Phono stage heresy

[The Outcast]

I was recently reflecting on some of the fantastic hifi equipment i have owned over the years and sometimes foolishly moved on. Whilst i was setting up a turntable for my son he asked me about phono stages i had owned over the years and which i thought was the best. This caused me to be brutely honest with myself and remember the best based on enjoyment and not cost or kudos.
Oddly enough, the ones i think were the best musically and sonically were built into pre amps and not stand alone units. The best phono stage i have heard (of the ones i have owned) is without doubt the one that was built into my Beard CA506 pre amp closely followed by the one built into my Exposure pre amp.
I do realise that this flys in the face of current wisdom and indeed an act of heresy, but i am convinced that short signal paths are as important as other factors ie being built into seperate cases etc. Good design and componantry is the key and not simply being built into another box.
Which is the best phono stage you have heard or owned?:sofa:

[Audioman]

The Audiolab 8000A is not so well regarded today but it came with a very nice sounding phono stage. Wouldn't say best but it would give some current mid market stages stiff competition. Remember stand alone phonos only became popular when amps stopped including them in the assumption everyone was moving to CD.

[The Outcast]

Agreed on both accoubts Paul. My son is still using an 8000A and it's still making some rather nice sounds.
The Audiolab 8000A is not so well regarded today but it came with a very nice sounding phono stage. Wouldn't say best but it would give some current mid market stages stiff competition. Remember stand alone phonos only became popular when amps stopped including them in the assumption everyone was moving to CD.

[YNWaN]

By far, in fact by a huge margin, the best phono stage I have ever heard/used is the Paradise (low output MC only) - it sounds like every part of your amplification chain has been significantly upgraded!

I'm afraid my findings don't really support you 'phono stage heresy' hypothesis though as the Paradise is a four box unit filling four Naim shoe box cases (so quite a bit bigger than most power amps).

[f1eng]

The two best analogue phono stages I have owned were the one (optionally) built into my Spectral DMC 20 ref preamp and my Goldmund PH2 stand alone (which I still have).

The very best phono stage I have heard is the one in the Devialet D-Premier amp, the only analogue bit of that is the cartridge loading, after which the signal is digitised and RIAA correction applied digitally. It is the clearest, quietest phono stage I have heard.

Now theres a bit of heresy for you.;)

[StanleyB]

The TC-760LC and TC-750 are two well spoken of phono stages on the net. And I even sell them on-line because of their value for money performance.

[Oldpinkman]

Oh dear
You know what I'm going to say. The good news is I agree with Hesketh - the best I've heard was in a preamp. (to be fair, I haven't heard many separate phono stages - I'm from the days when everybody listened to records)

The bad news is - it's the PIP. Pip 2 may be even better, but the phono stage is essentially the same

And by some margin - to the point where I find respected standards like the audiolab and Quad 34/44 just too dull to enjoy music on. Pip was in a class of its own (that I have heard)

Before that - another in a preamp - the Audio Research SP10

:)

[loo]

A pip fan too , unbeatable at its price when new, the pip2 was something else and rightly deserves it's folk law status , as for available cost no option stages mine would be
Valve~ Manley labs steelhead
SS~ NLE 17 + dual Ct 101 power supplies (possibly the best Phonostage yet conceived )
Paul

[Oldpinkman]

A pip fan too , unbeatable at its price when new, the pip2 was something else and rightly deserves it's folk law status , as for available cost no option stages mine would be
Valve~ Manley labs steelhead
SS~ NLE 17 + dual Ct 101 power supplies (possibly the best Phonostage yet conceived )
Paul
I wonder. I'm biased. But interesting to see what we flush out. I reckon the only people who don't reckon the pip the best phono stage they've heard are the ones who haven't heard it :)

[Firebottle]

Richard, do you run MM and MC carts? I may have a proposition,

:cool: Alan

[Oldpinkman]

I have both. Tricky playing em both at the same time though :)

[Oldpinkman]

I've been propositioned! It's like being at a teenage prom :eyebrows:

[Gordon Steadman]

I've been propositioned! It's like being at a teenage prom :eyebrows:

Its better than being prepositioned - if I'm not teaching my grammer to suck eggs.

[Barry]

I've always been satisfied with the phono boards of the Quad 44. The only other phonostages I have heard have been the Hafler DH101 (MM only) and the Linn LINNK (MC only, and obviously designed for the Linn Asak). IMHO they are similar but no better than the Quad.

The EMT 135 equalisation amplifier fitted to the EMT 930 deck is obviously designed to be used with the TSD-15 cartridge, is pretty good and on a par with the above.

However the best phonostage I have heard to date is the Mark Levinson ML-25 (both for MM and MC cartridges) used with the ML-26 preamp.

Since all pickup cartridges are essentially balanced devices, I am on the lookout for a truly balanced phonostage, that is has balanced input and outputs. The Aquos looks like it could fit the bill, but it has had some indifferent reviews.

[blake]

Since all pickup cartridges are essentially balanced devices, I am on the lookout for a truly balanced phonostage, that is has balanced input and outputs. The Aquos looks like it could fit the bill, but it has had some indifferent reviews.

Hi Barry:

I think you mean "Aqvox".

I've owned the Aqvox for about 5 years now and although IMO it is a phenomenal phono stage and great value (I have no desire to ever really upgrade from it at this stage), it is a bit of a quirky product and I would only recommend it to someone who intends to run balanced from the table straight into the Aqvox with a high quality low output MC, preferably one with a low internal impedance.

In "unbalanced" mode, there is nothing particularly special about the Aqvox. In balanced mode with the right MC, I believe it can hold its own with some very pricey phono stages, or at least units 3-4X its price, and many of the reviews do indeed report that.

The Aqvox also probably works best with low output moving coils which also have a low internal impedance, say from 3-15 ohms. So it's best to be used with a low output, low impedance MC with a balanced tonearm lead. Do that and you will be very, very happy with it. Using a MM or high output MC into the unbalanced inputs of the Aqvox would be a waste of money IMO.

The best stage that I've ever heard is the battery powered ASR Basis Exclusive, although I did hear it in a much better system than mine.

[YNWaN]

Project is about to launch a fully balanced phono amp - input and output - £600 I believe.

[Barry]

Hi Barry:

I think you mean "Aqvox".

I've owned the Aqvox for about 5 years now and although IMO it is a phenomenal phono stage and great value (I have no desire to ever really upgrade from it at this stage), it is a bit of a quirky product and I would only recommend it to someone who intends to run balanced from the table straight into the Aqvox with a high quality low output MC, preferably one with a low internal impedance.

In "unbalanced" mode, there is nothing particularly special about the Aqvox. In balanced mode with the right MC, I believe it can hold its own with some very pricey phono stages, or at least units 3-4X its price, and many of the reviews do indeed report that.

The Aqvox also probably works best with low output moving coils which also have a low internal impedance, say from 3-15 ohms. So it's best to be used with a low output, low impedance MC with a balanced tonearm lead. Do that and you will be very, very happy with it. Using a MM or high output MC into the unbalanced inputs of the Aqvox would be a waste of money IMO.

The best stage that I've ever heard is the battery powered ASR Basis Exclusive, although I did hear it in a much better system than mine.

Hi Blake,

Yes, it was the Aqvox I had in mind. It would be used with either an SME arm or a Breuer arm, both having their arm leads replaced with balanced-line cables terminated in Cannon XLR connectors. The Aqvox output would then run into either a Mark Levinson ML26 or 28 preamp, both of which are dual mono fully balanced designs.

Regarding cartridges, they would be EMT or Ortofon SPU, though I would like to try a Koetsu. Can the Aqvox be switched to MM mode, whilst still being balanced? - I like to use a Decca cartridge from time to time.



Project is about to launch a fully balanced phono amp - input and output - £600 I believe

Yes, I have heard about this. I believe Hi-Fi Choice magazine ran a favourable review of this phonostage a few months back. I shall have to investigate further.

Thanks

[Oldpinkman]

Its better than being prepositioned - if I'm not teaching my grammer to suck eggs.

Very good GS! Been reading a few other posts and realised I am far to pissed to comment sensibly, I think I'll drink more, and look again in the morning :cool:

[blake]

Hi Blake,

Yes, it was the Aqvox I had in mind. It would be used with either an SME arm or a Breuer arm, both having their arm leads replaced with balanced-line cables terminated in Cannon XLR connectors. The Aqvox output would then run into either a Mark Levinson ML26 or 28 preamp, both of which are dual mono fully balanced designs.

Regarding cartridges, they would be EMT or Ortofon SPU, though I would like to try a Koetsu. Can the Aqvox be switched to MM mode, whilst still being balanced? - I like to use a Decca cartridge from time to time.

Thanks

Hi Barry:

Balanced/Current Injection input on the Aqvox is MC only (high output or low output) so you'd have to go back to a single ended tonearm lead for the Decca. Huge performance difference IMO between the balanced and unbalanced inputs on the Aqvox although I've never used a MM with it.

I'd expect the EMT to work pretty well, but the SPU's and Koetsu line should be a stellar match with the Aqvox with their low impedances.

[Barry]

Thanks Blake.

[krugdoktor]

Be careful with EMTs 'cause they have a rather highish internal impendance of 20 ohms and a higher than average output of 1mV@5cm/sec. I run my JSD 6 into a dedicated SUT from H.M.Fabritius (http://www.fabtech.de/de_eigene-produkte_stc.html) which was used in the famous EMT turntables. Technical specs for all EMT catridges are the same except the LZ-Tondose (http://www.fabtech.de/de_tonabnehmer_lz-systeme.html) which is compatible with Ortofon's SPU.
Have to add my JSD 6 sounds fabolous mounted on an SME V on a Techy 1210.

[Oldpinkman]

I've always been satisfied with the phono boards of the Quad 44. The only other phonostages I have heard have been the Hafler DH101 (MM only) and the Linn LINNK (MC only, and obviously designed for the Linn Asak). IMHO they are similar but no better than the Quad.

The EMT 135 equalisation amplifier fitted to the EMT 930 deck is obviously designed to be used with the TSD-15 cartridge, is pretty good and on a par with the above.

However the best phonostage I have heard to date is the Mark Levinson ML-25 (both for MM and MC cartridges) used with the ML-26 preamp.

Since all pickup cartridges are essentially balanced devices, I am on the lookout for a truly balanced phonostage, that is has balanced input and outputs. The Aquos looks like it could fit the bill, but it has had some indifferent reviews.

I agree most phono stages and preamps are very similar. I know mains cables make a HUGE difference, almost as big as the difference the colour of the living room curtains makes, but most phono stages and preamps were only slightly more different than that. Cartridges and loudspeakers are truly great big obvious differences. To a lesser extent, but still apparant tonearms and turntables. Amps generally are more similar than different and I wonder at the skill of reviewers picking out things to talk about.

Pip was very different. One of my "ratchet" products - very hard to go back once you've had a chance to get used to it.

[FunkArt]

Oh dear
You know what I'm going to say. The good news is I agree with Hesketh - the best I've heard was in a preamp. (to be fair, I haven't heard many separate phono stages - I'm from the days when everybody listened to records)

The bad news is - it's the PIP. Pip 2 may be even better, but the phono stage is essentially the same

And by some margin - to the point where I find respected standards like the audiolab and Quad 34/44 just too dull to enjoy music on. Pip was in a class of its own (that I have heard)

Before that - another in a preamp - the Audio Research SP10

:)


"Pip II may be even better...the phono stage is essentially the same"
Richard, for shame. You ought to know better. You do after all go name-dropping with Mr Jones.

Pip II may be topologically related to Pip I but it was a total re-design and as such it easily bettered Pip I on all counts. For crying out, it cost four times as much, when it came out.
(Oh. YOu'd now like to to borrow one, just to verify (of course)?) Well, be it on your petrol (diesel)).

So much so, that un-benownst to us in a Japanese magazine and against all comers, it was a very full shoot-out. I think I've still got the copy somewhere. The winner was a certain niche, British pre-amp with its phono stage given especial mention.
Modesty forbids me to name which one...but I think I've still got the copy somewhere.
I'm expecting something similar to come out in 2014.



Now, here's one for which I have no explanation and we didn't have time to investigate.
I'm wondering if any of you out there in the ether may be able to shed some light.

We were always looking to improve our productsOn this occasion, we turned to the effects that signal path resistors might be having. There were only about 8 per channel. We ordered specific resistors from Vishay - at the time, I think they cost us about £100! and changed the resistors in the signal path of Pip II from the selected, already close tolerance metal films we were using.
We expected a minor change, dare I say hoped for an improvement.
What we got blew our heads off!
The sound of the unit literally changed and to our ears not necessarily in a way we liked. Talk about "glass clear"! Others liked it.
This particular unit is still doing the circuit popping up every so often on fleabay etc.
To this day, the degree of change seemed quite, quite disproportionate to the alterations made.

Thoughts?

Arthur

[Oldpinkman]

The boy Jones is supposed to be digging out a couple of old boards from the loft for me to install in a sensible bloody case. Don't start going all AOS hyperbole on me. I lugged a Pip 2 around enough dealers in my day. Yes - it was different, but a smaller difference (MUCH) to say Quad 44 to Pip. Pip is a ratchet product for me. Pip 2 was better, but I can live with Pip. Was going to post more, but I think I need a private word with you Mr K.

[Oldpinkman]

So - that's "yes please" to a Pip 2 loan, and yes it is your round next time :cool:

And we have an Integral to strip...

And I'll consult the Oracle about the others, but as you know it is an open-ended task which charged by the hour could bankrupt a small nation... :eek: He also has product he has designed launching at Denver

[Oldpinkman]

[I]"On this occasion, we turned to the effects that signal path resistors might be having. There were only about 8 per channel. We ordered specific resistors from Vishay - at the time, I think they cost us about £100! and changed the resistors in the signal path of Pip II from the selected, already close tolerance metal films we were using.
We expected a minor change, dare I say hoped for an improvement.
What we got blew our heads off!
The sound of the unit literally changed and to our ears not necessarily in a way we liked. Talk about "glass clear"! Others liked it.
This particular unit is still doing the circuit popping up every so often on fleabay etc.
To this day, the degree of change seemed quite, quite disproportionate to the alterations made.

Thoughts?

Arthur

Oh and Arthur - it's clear you are a virgin on AOS. Here, people can hear the difference made by changing the mains cable on their aunts laser printer at the other end of the country. Resistors in the signal path are a given. Far more importantly I bought some 1% metal films from fleabay recently for the Pip header, and they are audibly noisy. You can't be too careful. :rolleyes:

[Ali Tait]

Takman are a very good, inexpensive resistor.

[YNWaN]

Now, here's one for which I have no explanation and we didn't have time to investigate.
I'm wondering if any of you out there in the ether may be able to shed some light.

We were always looking to improve our productsOn this occasion, we turned to the effects that signal path resistors might be having. There were only about 8 per channel. We ordered specific resistors from Vishay - at the time, I think they cost us about £100! and changed the resistors in the signal path of Pip II from the selected, already close tolerance metal films we were using.
We expected a minor change, dare I say hoped for an improvement.
What we got blew our heads off!
The sound of the unit literally changed and to our ears not necessarily in a way we liked. Talk about "glass clear"! Others liked it.
This particular unit is still doing the circuit popping up every so often on fleabay etc.
To this day, the degree of change seemed quite, quite disproportionate to the alterations made.

Thoughts?

Arthur

I'm not sure what thoughts you would like? Without knowing the circuit it's impossible to draw any real conclusions. However, if the resistors were changed for ones with nominally the same value one must conclude that different resistors sound different - but that is hardly a revelation.

[FunkArt]

I'm not sure what thoughts you would like? Without knowing the circuit it's impossible to draw any real conclusions. However, if the resistors were changed for ones with nominally the same value one must conclude that different resistors sound different - but that is hardly a revelation.

The point was the degree. We are talking here about extreme differences, not incremental; an order of magnitude and nothing that fitted into any experiences, previous or since!

[YNWaN]

Are you absolutely sure the values were the same?

[Barry]

Be careful with EMTs 'cause they have a rather highish internal impendance of 20 ohms and a higher than average output of 1mV@5cm/sec. I run my JSD 6 into a dedicated SUT from H.M.Fabritius (http://www.fabtech.de/de_eigene-produkte_stc.html) which was used in the famous EMT turntables. Technical specs for all EMT catridges are the same except the LZ-Tondose (http://www.fabtech.de/de_tonabnehmer_lz-systeme.html) which is compatible with Ortofon's SPU.
Have to add my JSD 6 sounds fabolous mounted on an SME V on a Techy 1210.

Thanks for that Michael.

According to the spec sheet supplied with my EMT TSD-15 (I have two of them: one fitted with a spherical tip, the other with a "fine line stylus") and EMT XSD-15 cartridges, the internal resistance is 22 Ohm and the output 0.15mV.sec/cm, so 0.75mV@5cm/sec.

To date I have run them either into the Quad44 fitted with "4A" phono boards, or a Mark Levinson ML-25 phonostage set to 100 Ohm and 44dB gain.

I'm not sure what the loading is on the EMT 155st equalisation amplifier fitted to my EMT390 turntable. I'll have to look at the circuit, but from memory I believe it is ~ 200 Ohm.

Nice to learn the JSD 6 is a good match with the SME V. I have a "nude" or stripped-down EMT 15 generator that needs repair. One day I will probably buy myself an SME V and fit the EMT into that.

Thanks again

[FunkArt]

Are you absolutely sure the values were the same?

Would being Laser trimmed to match be deemed a good enough? ;)
- hence the (gulp) £100 price tag (1980s prices!!) for 8 resistors.

[Oldpinkman]

Arthur you're hyperbole-ing about electronics. In public. I'll set the boy jones on you. You know the rule. If its real - repeat it! Too long ago. Too many variables, sample size of one...:mental:

[YNWaN]

Would being Laser trimmed to match be deemed a good enough? ;)
- hence the (gulp) £100 price tag (1980s prices!!) for 8 resistors.

I was thinking more of the ones that were replaced, rather than the replacements?

I've used Z-foil resistors as cartridge loading and heard a (IMO) worthwhile difference - but subjective quantity is not easy to judge/compare.

[Floyddroid]

I have indeed found the subject of phono stages to be a bloomin mine field. Had some great on board jobbies. The Exposure on board circuits were very good i recall. What i have learned of late though is that obtaining a phono stage that gives you somewhere near the sound you are wanting and twaeking it with various componants just like Mr Arkless does is the road to Nirvana.
Of the stand alone units i have heard that sound freat straight out of the box is Virkon's Ayre which does sound the dogs.:thumbsup:

[Oldpinkman]

Got my new toy. Will let you know when its working if Arthur was right :)

[paskinn]

Can't agree. I owned the Pip 11, and then a fully vishayed version. It was a fine bit of kit, but there are plenty of phonostages that can match it, at least to my ears. The best are usually based round valves with a really fine step-up, and they are pricey too. Never owned the SP10 but did have an SP11, which was lovely. Conrad Johnson also made especially fine sounding devices. Among the more affordable stuff...Croft is the one. And for thosed who prefer solid state, my vote would go for one of the LFD devices. Comfortably the best ss I ever heard. Curiously, Richard Bewes was connected to the Pip through Malcolm Hawksford and Essex University. Small world. The LFD battery phonostage, vastly expensive, was a big advance on the Pip. Very special.

[Batty]

The Copland CSA-14 has a very nice MM phonostage, coupled with a good step up device works well with MC too (does that count as a 2 box solution?).
As I have 2 TTs running atm I use the Copland for MM and a Bugle2 for MC.

[paskinn]

Can't agree. I owned the Pip 11, and then a fully vishayed version. It was a fine bit of kit, but there are plenty of phonostages that can match it, at least to my ears. The best are usually based round valves with a really fine step-up, and they are pricey too. Never owned the SP10 but did have an SP11, which was lovely. Conrad Johnson also made especially fine sounding devices. Among the more affordable stuff...Croft is the one. And for thosed who prefer solid state, my vote would go for one of the LFD devices. Comfortably the best ss I ever heard. Curiously, Richard Bewes was connected to the Pip through Malcolm Hawksford and Essex University. Small world. The LFD battery phonostage, vastly expensive, was a big advance on the Pip. Very special.

Being more dense than usual. The vishayed unit Arthur talks about must have been my unit; he did it for me just before Christmas probably 20 years ago. How time flies.....it's too long ago to be sure, but I didn't feel the pip had been transformed....improved would be fairer, to my ears. It still sounded like the Pip. but a touch smoother and darker. For me, Arthur's great triumph was the 'Anniversary', which he now spends time modifying. Shame, because it was always such a classy deck in its own right. My particular fantasy was a Pink Anniversary built by SME. Pink made great products....sorry, rambling through old age and nostalgia.