Opinions on Tribute SUTs

[farflungstar]

Does anyone have experience of these?

After

Sent from my Aquaris E4.5 using Tapatalk

[Ammonite Audio]

I'm presuming that you've seen this piece from TNT http://www.tnt-audio.com/accessories/mc_3xfr_e.html

I have no experience of these transformers but I do feel that there is probably a good reason why almost nobody makes such transformers using toroidal cores.

[alcarmichael]

Yes, outstanding SUT, for me it bettered the highly acclaimed Hashimoto H7's.

[RothwellAudio]

I'm presuming that you've seen this piece from TNT http://www.tnt-audio.com/accessories/mc_3xfr_e.html

I have no experience of these transformers but I do feel that there is probably a good reason why almost nobody makes such transformers using toroidal cores.
Actually, they aren't the only ones making toroidal SUTs but it is much more difficult to put windings on a toroidal core than a simple bobbin as used in common EI laminated cores. The machines commonly used to wind toroidal mains transformers won't work with toroids as small as the ones usually used in MC step-up transformers. However, toroidal cores do have advantages. Just as toroidal mains transformers radiate less magnetic field than EI mains transformers, toroidal step-up transformers pick up less external magnetic fields.

No, I have no direct experience of the Tribute transformers but I have no reason to doubt their performance.

[Ali Tait]

I have a set. Best I've tried by a country mile, and that includes Hashis, AN, Mayware, Klangfilm and Luxman.

[Arkless Electronics]

Or for better still performance there are head amps such as the one's I make.... Check out review here http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?48779-Arkless-MC-Head-Amp-Full-Review&p=822156#post822156

[anubisgrau]

Or for better still performance there are head amps such as the one's I make.... Check out review here http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?48779-Arkless-MC-Head-Amp-Full-Review&p=822156#post822156


do we really need this kind of commercial interference, especially when not true!

btw, there's quite some toroidal step up transformers out there, tribute, luxman, fidelity research are certainly not "nobody there"

[farflungstar]

I'm happy for arkless to chip in wth his opinion that head amps are better (and even his somewhat shameless plug. grin) as I'm intelligent enough to read up on as many opinions as possible - and of course I read the arkless review but without context (a shoot out) it's impossible to know how it would fair in my system against other contenders. The consensus is in favour of SUT but as all in things it's about system synergy.

Adey

Sent from my Aquaris E4.5 using Tapatalk

[sjs]

The Ortofon T-2000 is also a toroidal core SUT, wound with silver wire and originally released to go with the low output MC2000.

[alcarmichael]

do we really need this kind of commercial interference, especially when not true!

btw, there's quite some toroidal step up transformers out there, tribute, luxman, fidelity research are certainly not "nobody there"

Why do you say 'especially when not true'?

[RothwellAudio]

Why do you say 'especially when not true'?

Here's a quote from the link in post #2

"In my experience, every active moving coil input stage degrades the sounds way too much. While it is possible to do active stages today, which have practically no detectable noise, it is the bass region and the bass quality where the problem lies. Active devices are drifting with temperature, operating point and under work, and if input signals are smaller than 1mV, the drift gets into the way of the music. Bass lines are muddy then and drum players seem to play like if they are drunk. So the music is lacking immediateness, and rather sounds hollow, uninvolving, uninteresting."

Convincing people like that that headamps are superior to SUTs is going to be a hard job. Of course, there's been a similar debate for years about valves and transistors, and things like distortion measurements don't seem to have any impact on the debate.
Anyway, to some people it will be true that SUTs are superior to active headamps. To others it won't be.
Personally, I think good examples of either technology can sound great. Bad examples of either technology don't.

[Arkless Electronics]

do we really need this kind of commercial interference, especially when not true!

btw, there's quite some toroidal step up transformers out there, tribute, luxman, fidelity research are certainly not "nobody there"

I can assure you that the best head amps are easily as good as the best SUT's and in some cases better. As always in our hobby "Chinese whispers" are spread and "urban myths" abound, many of them completely untrue. There are very few head amps around for comparison to SUT's and many of those are not particularly high end. How many head amps have you tried before coming to the conclusion that SUT's are better? Or did you, as is usual in these cases, read it somewhere?

[Arkless Electronics]

Here's a quote from the link in post #2

"In my experience, every active moving coil input stage degrades the sounds way too much. While it is possible to do active stages today, which have practically no detectable noise, it is the bass region and the bass quality where the problem lies. Active devices are drifting with temperature, operating point and under work, and if input signals are smaller than 1mV, the drift gets into the way of the music. Bass lines are muddy then and drum players seem to play like if they are drunk. So the music is lacking immediateness, and rather sounds hollow, uninvolving, uninteresting."

Convincing people like that that headamps are superior to SUTs is going to be a hard job. Of course, there's been a similar debate for years about valves and transistors, and things like distortion measurements don't seem to have any impact on the debate.
Anyway, to some people it will be true that SUTs are superior to active headamps. To others it won't be.
Personally, I think good examples of either technology can sound great. Bad examples of either technology don't.

Absolute rubbish to the first highlighted bit.

The second I agree with. The thing that bothers on this is that, to follow on from my last post, "Chinese whispers" from people without the technical knowledge to hold an opinion one way or the other on which is theoretically better, are being propagated, without any comparison with top quality head amps (rare on the ground) and used to build a weight of incorrect opinion that SUT's are better, which is a falsehood.

I'm not claiming any huge superiority for head amps over SUT's, just that when done optimally they are at least as good.

Comparing 30 year old £60 head amps from ebay with £1000 SUT's is not exactly a fair comparison and yes one would expect the SUT to win here.

I have not done any sort of search as to what's available new today in the realms of head amps and the only "high end" head amps I personally know of (I'm sure others will enlighten me on this) are the one I make and an even more expensive one from Paul Haynes designs. I recall in a long phone call from Marco a fair while ago him saying that both mine and the Paul Haynes unit had convinced him that a good head amp can be a least as good as the best SUT's... and this was in comparison with the top of the range Ortofon ST80 at around £1400. Marco actually bought the Paul Haynes unit! (double the £750 which mine costs).

[Arkless Electronics]

Yes, outstanding SUT, for me it bettered the highly acclaimed Hashimoto H7's.

Alex, you are maybe in a relatively rare position of owning a high end head amp (an Arkless MkI) and having experience of top end SUT's. From memory, you said at the time that you bought the Arkless head amp that you compared it to the Hashimoto HM7's and had a big preference for the Arkless head amp...
I believe you have done further experimentation with head amps since... Maybe you could add your own experiences here as I am in an unfortunate position of course that, as a manufacturer, everyone will always take the "you would say that" view to anything I say!

[alcarmichael]

I've had a play with some very nice kit in my system for someone relatively new to vinyl, transformers used were the Hashimoto H7's found in the Choir Audio SUT-H7 and the Tribute SUT. Active stages were the Denon HA-1000 and the Arkless Mk1.

I liked every single one of them and would've been happy to keep any of them. For me though the Arkless was the best for me in my system. It's an outstanding bit of kit and enables me to enjoy the music how I prefer it. It has bags of energy, drive and balls, the bass produced is phenomenal, deep, powerful and tuneful, it's also delicate with softer music and vocals sound so realistic.

For what its worth my research also led me to believe that an SUT was the way to go. When I first heard the H7's I was a very, very happy man. I had absolutely no belief that the Arkless head amp would sound better than what I was hearing with the Choir Audio in my system. I was wrong.

[RothwellAudio]

As far as I'm aware there aren't many new headamps around at all. There's the Graham Slee Elevator, the Lounge Audio Copla and of course the one I make, the Headspace. There's also an unbelievably cheap one from Little Bear. A google search for "headamp" turned up nothing but headphone amplifiers until my Headspace on page 4 of the search results.
Jez is absolutely correct that very few people have had the chance to compare directly headamps and SUTs (ie using SUTs and standalone headamps into the same MM phonostage) simply because there are so few headamps around, but many people have used mm/mc phonostages set to mc operation and also tried a SUT into the same phonostage set to mm. That does give some level of comparison but it's when a SUT and Phonostage A is compared to Phonostage B (set to mc) that comparisons start to become tenuous.
Just to add to the confusion some people will say that they have used their cartridge with a SUT and Phonostage A and compared it to Phonostage B and preferred one or the other - then point out that the cartridge load in one instance is (say) 400 ohms and in the other instance is 100 ohms, therefore the optimum load for that cartridge is 100 ohms. There are too many variables there to draw those types of conclusions imo.

[Arkless Electronics]

I've had a play with some very nice kit in my system for someone relatively new to vinyl, transformers used were the Hashimoto H7's found in the Choir Audio SUT-H7 and the Tribute SUT. Active stages were the Denon HA-1000 and the Arkless Mk1.

I liked every single one of them and would've been happy to keep any of them. For me though the Arkless was the best for me in my system. It's an outstanding bit of kit and enables me to enjoy the music how I prefer it. It has bags of energy, drive and balls, the bass produced is phenomenal, deep, powerful and tuneful, it's also delicate with softer music and vocals sound so realistic.

For what its worth my research also led me to believe that an SUT was the way to go. When I first heard the H7's I was a very, very happy man. I had absolutely no belief that the Arkless head amp would sound better than what I was hearing with the Choir Audio in my system. I was wrong.

:)

I just wish more people who make claims along the lines of "everyone knows SUT's are better than head amps" would have a think as to how they "know" this... (usually I'm sad to say this is "where they read it") and maybe seek out one of the (admittedly rare) high end head amps for comparison ;)

For the record, my own view is that:
1/ The very best head amps and SUT's are comparable... I'll admit a slight personal preference for the best head amps but we're talking Nth degree.

2/ When it comes to comparing mid priced or "less than the very best available" head amps and SUT's, the head amp will usually beat the SUT's.

3/ Head amps are vastly more flexible when it comes to cartridge matching etc. Just set the loading with the loading plugs (or small switches in some head amps) and that's it. New cart? Change the loading plugs or switch settings to suit. There's non of the fecking about with matching turns ratios etc....

4/ Head amps are also far less fussy in getting minimal mains hum than SUT's.

5/ SUT's win in terms of low noise. BUT... a good head amp will be quiet enough for it to be purely academic as the noise from the head amp will be much lower than the "vinyl roar" etc anyway. They do vary significantly in this parameter and in the case of some head amps which are less than optimal in this area, the noise can be a limitation in ultimate low level detail retrieval. With the best of head amps though this is just not an issue. I can make a head amp that is quiet enough and has enough gain for an Audio note Io for example, and due to the large turns ratio needed in a SUT for this job I would expect a clear win for the head amp here!

[Arkless Electronics]

As far as I'm aware there aren't many new headamps around at all. There's the Graham Slee Elevator, the Lounge Audio Copla and of course the one I make, the Headspace. There's also an unbelievably cheap one from Little Bear. A google search for "headamp" turned up nothing but headphone amplifiers until my Headspace on page 4 of the search results.
Jez is absolutely correct that very few people have had the chance to compare directly headamps and SUTs (ie using SUTs and standalone headamps into the same MM phonostage) simply because there are so few headamps around, but many people have used mm/mc phonostages set to mc operation and also tried a SUT into the same phonostage set to mm. That does give some level of comparison but it's when a SUT and Phonostage A is compared to Phonostage B (set to mc) that comparisons start to become tenuous.
Just to add to the confusion some people will say that they have used their cartridge with a SUT and Phonostage A and compared it to Phonostage B and preferred one or the other - then point out that the cartridge load in one instance is (say) 400 ohms and in the other instance is 100 ohms, therefore the optimum load for that cartridge is 100 ohms. There are too many variables there to draw those types of conclusions imo.

All good points Andrew. Plus of those that have compared head amps against SUT's how many have had access to a similarly high end head amp to compare to the maybe £800+ SUT's?

[struth]

People are entitled to voice their opinion. Just as long as they dont force it on anyone.:)

[Ali Tait]

Would agree both are equally good, just a little different. I've heard an earlier version of Jez's head amp, own Denon HA 500 & 1000 and also have a Firebottle built with Z foil resistors. I find head amps in general to have a slightly more up front sound, the best SUT's by comparison are a little more laid back by comparison.

[anubisgrau]

well i'm certainly not that hopeless to argue with a manufacturer of head amps what is better: a SUT or a head amp.



4/ Head amps are also far less fussy in getting minimal mains hum than SUT's.

:rolleyes:

maybe you're right, if you stuck a SUT into mains...

[anubisgrau]

Why do you say 'especially when not true'?

because it's not true that headamps have better performance than SUTs, as stated in a post i referred to.

[alcarmichael]

because it's not true that headamps have better performance than SUTs, as stated in a post i referred to.

Surely that's only your opinion. Have you tried the Arkless head amp in your system against a Tribute SUT? I have and I prefer the Arkless head amp.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clive]

My experience is with the Hagermann Piccolo head amp and S&B TX103 SUT feeding a valve phono stage. It's hard to pick a winner, it's more down to personal preference. The Piccolo to some will be a tad clinical and the SUT will be a fraction soft or alternatively some will find the Piccolo wonderfully open and transparent whereas others will find the SUTs flowing and musical. Aspects such as sound stage, bass, treble etc were really very similar. The Piccolo has the advantage of being easily configurable for gain and loading, it is however a little hissy at the highest gain setting.

I don't get why there has to be one approach which has to be seen as superior. As ever it's down to the design objectives and quality of implementation, in my opinion.

[anubisgrau]

Surely that's only your opinion. Have you tried the Arkless head amp in your system against a Tribute SUT? I have and I prefer the Arkless head amp.

good for you

[struth]

Come on lads... keep it friendly. :)

[RothwellAudio]

I find head amps in general to have a slightly more up front sound, the best SUT's by comparison are a little more laid back by comparison.
I would agree that assessment.


My experience is with the Hagermann Piccolo head amp and S&B TX103 SUT feeding a valve phono stage. It's hard to pick a winner, it's more down to personal preference. The Piccolo to some will be a tad clinical and the SUT will be a fraction soft or alternatively some will find the Piccolo wonderfully open and transparent whereas others will find the SUTs flowing and musical. Aspects such as sound stage, bass, treble etc were really very similar. The Piccolo has the advantage of being easily configurable for gain and loading, it is however a little hissy at the highest gain setting.

I don't get why there has to be one approach which has to be seen as superior. As ever it's down to the design objectives and quality of implementation, in my opinion.
Yes, I'd agree with that too.

[Arkless Electronics]

My experience is with the Hagermann Piccolo head amp and S&B TX103 SUT feeding a valve phono stage. It's hard to pick a winner, it's more down to personal preference. The Piccolo to some will be a tad clinical and the SUT will be a fraction soft or alternatively some will find the Piccolo wonderfully open and transparent whereas others will find the SUTs flowing and musical. Aspects such as sound stage, bass, treble etc were really very similar. The Piccolo has the advantage of being easily configurable for gain and loading, it is however a little hissy at the highest gain setting.

I don't get why there has to be one approach which has to be seen as superior. As ever it's down to the design objectives and quality of implementation, in my opinion.

By and large yes. Which is why I've gone on a bit of a quest to quash the false assertion, sometimes propagated by those who don't know a resistor from an op amp, never mind their arse from their elbow, that "SUT's are definitely better than head amps and if you have a good MC cart and want the best from it only a SUT will do". This is simply wrong.

As an electronic engineer, a manufacturer and an audiophile, and not in any order, it really boils my piss to see certain things in this hobby of ours (not just this) become "accepted wisdom", when in fact completely WRONG and just because enough people, who sometimes don't even know what they are talking about, repeat the same falsehood, from often a flawed review in which a journalist has got it wrong.. sometimes other sources too...maybe even at a bake off a best in class type of product A was compared with 3 average examples of product type B and all declared on a forum that "products of the type A are always better than products of type B"..... This process of "Chinese whispers" grows what is sometimes a load of balderdash into being "the facts of the matter".... Usually if you try to get to the source of why something is apparently "a fact" it'll come down to "well I read it in Hi Fi Weekly... "... "several people on the xyz forum said so..." (probably cos one of them recalls reading it in that "hi fi weekly" article 3 years ago and written by a journalist who studied History at uni... or media studies:D)

This can unfortunately reach a point where the magnification effect of the Chinese whispers results in nobody believing it when they hear the real facts!! It gets to the point of "why should I believe you when I've read/heard the opposite in 30 other places".... Ask yourselves whether the 30 other people you've heard it from actually know what they are talking about or are they all in turn repeating what they've heard/read from an inaccurate source in the first place ;)

Edit: Here's some more guff for you lot :D Manufacturers and dealers can themselves be the source of techno-bollocks... for marketing reasons etc
"Lay people" in hi fi often believe that a 2 box solution is always better and a separate, bigger PSU is always better.. Now I went into a pretty full explanation of this a month or so ago so won't bother repeating it here but will instead give a true example of how things can go...

In a land far away some know as That London there was a hi fi company that we shall call Musical Fidelity who made an FM tuner to match their B1 integrated amplifier. Now after some time a MkII version came out at a higher price having apparently been "redesigned and improved" and part of this process and what one was paying for was a separate power supply.... The truth? The tuner board was bought in from a far east manufacturer and put in a MF box, you could buy the identical tuner under the Marantz brand name for half the price incidentally. In the Marantz application they had been wise enough to place supports under the mains transformer which was soldered directly to the PCB. MF hadn't done this and maybe half of the tuners they sent out were faulty on delivery due to the transformers weight fracturing the PCB in transit! The solution? De-solder the mains transformers and put them in a small plastic box with an umbilical cord to connect it to the main tuner! Yeah! Now MF weren't happy with this as it cost them a wee bit more to make and someone had to de-solder the transformers from the raw boards received from S. Korea... so they announced it was a redesigned and improved MkII with. amongst other things, a separate PSU for sound quality reasons.... The price was increased from about £270 to £380 (or £150 for the same tuner from Marantz :D) and the dealers and magazines duly reported how much better the MkII was.... Total bullshit! It was of course identical to the MkI and the transformer had been put in a separate box just to make sure they actually worked upon delivery!

This sort of thing goes on all the time folks... and if this model of tuner had risen to be one of the audiophile forums favourites, where "everybody knows" how good they are and that the MkII thrashes the MkI, how many would have believed me if I came along saying "it's bollocks. The Mk1 sounds the same but is less reliable blah blah etc etc"?.... If I hadn't been there and witnessed this whole process?

[alcarmichael]

I have the Mk 1 tuner. Are you able to carry out the modifications to turn it into the improved Mk 2 tuner for me please Jez?

[Arkless Electronics]

I have the Mk 1 tuner. Are you able to carry out the modifications to turn it into the improved Mk 2 tuner for me please Jez?

There's always one :D

[anubisgrau]

Manufacturers can themselves be the source of bollocks... for marketing reasons etc


how strange

[Arkless Electronics]

As someone with the rare experience of having tried high end head amps as well as high end SUT's I'm surprised The Great Leader hasn't opined his ha'porth as yet on the subject....

[farflungstar]

I like the example of musical fidelity and the tuner, but would argue that although their published reasons for doing it were dubious to say the least, there might have been a slight difference in performance by taking out the PSU, and hence positive reviews.

Without turning this (my original thread) into a sales pitch for arkless id like to ask what the quality of the components inside the box is, as I believe that there are sonic. differences between caps, resistors etc, id expect some 'boutique' components in there (nowt truly exotic, Elna cerafine for example) - if not would a unit with higher quality parts be available?

Adey

Sent from my Aquaris E4.5 using Tapatalk

[Arkless Electronics]

I like the example of musical fidelity and the tuner, but would argue that although their published reasons for doing it were dubious to say the least, there might have been a slight difference in performance by taking out the PSU, and hence positive reviews.

Without turning this (my original thread) into a sales pitch for arkless id like to ask what the quality of the components inside the box is, as I believe that there are sonic. differences between caps, resistors etc, id expect some 'boutique' components in there (nowt truly exotic, Elna cerafine for example) - if not would a unit with higher quality parts be available?

Adey

Sent from my Aquaris E4.5 using Tapatalk

Oops... sorry for hijacking your thread :) There's a thread documenting, with photos, the build of the last head amp I made here http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?48379-A-Head-Amp-underway-for-a-customer actually there a couple of Elna Cerafines in it! Good guess!

Very few of the components are ones directly in the signal path so it would be comparatively cheap to use Vishay bulk foils (about £12 each V 3P each for normal ones :eek:) and the only capacitor in the signal path is the output cap (Panasonic polypropylene used in this build) so not too expensive if one really wanted to fit boutique caps here. Most of the complexity etc is in the voltage regulation and power supply circuitry.

[farflungstar]

Don't worry you didn't hijack it.
Adey

Sent from my Aquaris E4.5 using Tapatalk

[alcarmichael]

I like the example of musical fidelity and the tuner, but would argue that although their published reasons for doing it were dubious to say the least, there might have been a slight difference in performance by taking out the PSU, and hence positive reviews.

Without turning this (my original thread) into a sales pitch for arkless id like to ask what the quality of the components inside the box is, as I believe that there are sonic. differences between caps, resistors etc, id expect some 'boutique' components in there (nowt truly exotic, Elna cerafine for example) - if not would a unit with higher quality parts be available?

Adey

Sent from my Aquaris E4.5 using Tapatalk

It would appear you're getting interested. If you didn't live so far away I would be happy to loan you mine for a trial run. It really is a great bit of kit, I can't recommend it high enough. Go for it :cool:

[farflungstar]

Weighing up options, researching, cogitating...
Adey

Sent from my Aquaris E4.5 using Tapatalk

[montesquieu]

Surely that's only your opinion. Have you tried the Arkless head amp in your system against a Tribute SUT? I have and I prefer the Arkless head amp.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Alex I'm quite curious as to the rest of your system when you made that comparison.

I've done it time and and time again, something repeated at intervals over many years, SUTS against both headamps and MC stages, compared using a whole raft of high-end cartridges from an Io2 to Koetsus to Miyajima to top end SPUs - and always the high-end SUTS always come out on top ... I've owned a few nice SUTs, not just the HM7s but Kondo-era AN-S6c, the internals in my current EAR 912, S&B TX103, Jorgen Schou for Ortofon SPU, quite a few others ... beating MC inputs and head amps alike essentially every time.

Plus points for the best SUTs - quietness (once you get them positioned), immediacy, dynamics, musicality. Down side is principally matching, both impedance and gain - easy to get it not so much wrong, but 'not quite right' with sub-optimal results.

Plus points for head amps - a lot less faff when it comes to hum, much more flexibility in matching with a variety of cartridges, and unquestionably more sound per pound. Down sides - hiss, and the ineffable ... I don't know, hifi wise they can be very good indeed, but musically even really good ones like the Slee Elevator (which I realy rate, don't get me wrong) just fall short of the very best SUTs for me. In my experience of course. But you pays your money ...





I have not done any sort of search as to what's available new today in the realms of head amps and the only "high end" head amps I personally know of (I'm sure others will enlighten me on this) are the one I make and an even more expensive one from Paul Haynes designs. I recall in a long phone call from Marco a fair while ago him saying that both mine and the Paul Haynes unit had convinced him that a good head amp can be a least as good as the best SUT's... and this was in comparison with the top of the range Ortofon ST80 at around £1400. Marco actually bought the Paul Haynes unit! (double the £750 which mine costs).

I wouldn't put the ST80 anywhere near the top rank of SUTs, it's overpriced by a mile by the sound of the one I heard (with an SPU incidentally).

I have heard great things about the Paul Hynes BTW I would love to hear one.

[anubisgrau]

oh, ST-80 is now the benchmark SUT?

then you really don't need a 750 UKP product to put it against (let alone paul heynes' designs which are FWIW a top notch), you can save 90% and knock yourself for an afternoon a headamp with a handful of parts - 2 x 2SK170, a few resistors and caps plus a 24V battery supply, just as jean hiraga did it some 35 yrs ago. i doubt you would spend more than a 50 quid, a chasis included.

or buy yourself a kit for $49:
http://diyaudioprojects.com/Solid/JFET-MC-Pre-Preamp-Kit/

[alcarmichael]

Alex I'm quite curious as to the rest of your system when you made that comparison.

I've done it time and and time again, something repeated at intervals over many years, SUTS against both headamps and MC stages, compared using a whole raft of high-end cartridges from an Io2 to Koetsus to Miyajima to top end SPUs - and always the high-end SUTS always come out on top ... I've owned a few nice SUTs, not just the HM7s but Kondo-era AN-S6c, the internals in my current EAR 912, S&B TX103, Jorgen Schou for Ortofon SPU, quite a few others ... beating MC inputs and head amps alike essentially every time.

Plus points for the best SUTs - quietness (once you get them positioned), immediacy, dynamics, musicality. Down side is principally matching, both impedance and gain - easy to get it not so much wrong, but 'not quite right' with sub-optimal results.

Plus points for head amps - a lot less faff when it comes to hum, much more flexibility in matching with a variety of cartridges, and unquestionably more sound per pound. Down sides - hiss, and the ineffable ... I don't know, hifi wise they can be very good indeed, but musically even really good ones like the Slee Elevator (which I realy rate, don't get me wrong) just fall short of the very best SUTs for me. In my experience of course. But you pays your money ...




I wouldn't put the ST80 anywhere near the top rank of SUTs, it's overpriced by a mile by the sound of the one I heard (with an SPU incidentally).

I have heard great things about the Paul Hynes BTW I would love to hear one.

Hi Tom,

The rest of my system was a modified 1210 as source, the head amp's and SUT's were into a Croft 25R/RS into a Croft series 7 to B&W 805's. If you're interested in giving the Arkless a go you're welcome to try it.

Cheers,
Alex

[Arkless Electronics]

Alex I'm quite curious as to the rest of your system when you made that comparison.

I've done it time and and time again, something repeated at intervals over many years, SUTS against both headamps and MC stages, compared using a whole raft of high-end cartridges from an Io2 to Koetsus to Miyajima to top end SPUs - and always the high-end SUTS always come out on top ... I've owned a few nice SUTs, not just the HM7s but Kondo-era AN-S6c, the internals in my current EAR 912, S&B TX103, Jorgen Schou for Ortofon SPU, quite a few others ... beating MC inputs and head amps alike essentially every time.

Plus points for the best SUTs - quietness (once you get them positioned), immediacy, dynamics, musicality. Down side is principally matching, both impedance and gain - easy to get it not so much wrong, but 'not quite right' with sub-optimal results.

Plus points for head amps - a lot less faff when it comes to hum, much more flexibility in matching with a variety of cartridges, and unquestionably more sound per pound. Down sides - hiss, and the ineffable ... I don't know, hifi wise they can be very good indeed, but musically even really good ones like the Slee Elevator (which I realy rate, don't get me wrong) just fall short of the very best SUTs for me. In my experience of course. But you pays your money ...




I wouldn't put the ST80 anywhere near the top rank of SUTs, it's overpriced by a mile by the sound of the one I heard (with an SPU incidentally).

I have heard great things about the Paul Hynes BTW I would love to hear one.

I respect what you say Tom but I would say that for reasons long lost in the annals of hi fi but related to makers of MC's being used to using fine wire and winding stuff... SUT's were always more common. There is a dearth of really good high end head amps out there. Marco reckoned that the Paul Heynes pipped mine yes... it is around £1500 I believe and there are further upgrades I would be doing on mine if able to sell them at this price. he also reckoned it was not that much better than my MkI, which was itself upgraded after that before Alcarmicheal bought it. Since then there is my MkII as favourably reviewed recently on AOS.

I don't doubt for one second your findings and sincerity on this but I would say that there are not many truly high end head amps out there to compare top SUT's against, and that the likes of offerings from myself and Paul Haynes my change your mind... or at least persuade you that the two methods are equal when equal effort and resources have been put into them :)

[Arkless Electronics]

Hi Tom,

The rest of my system was a modified 1210 as source, the head amp's and SUT's were into a Croft 25R/RS into a Croft series 7 to B&W 805's. If you're interested in giving the Arkless a go you're welcome to try it.

Cheers,
Alex

Just noticed that Alex has very kindly offered to lend Tom his MkI Arkless head amp! Go for it Tom and Alex:) You have nothing to lose in allowing a top quality head amp it's voice amongst amongst the many very high end SUT's you've tried.. not that top quality head amps are common.. bit of a niche product! Hence you can not have tried many....
I'm sure you will have the wherewithal to make up various loading plugs to experiment with your various cartridges Tom?......
This should be interesting! Yes there is a further improved MkII... and if I was to be selling one for the £1500 of the Paul Haynes model there would be things I'd be doing above even the MkII... Head amps are such a niche product that I don't expect to sell more than the odd one here and there, it's not my "bread and butter".. my only stake in this is as an engineer, to try and show that when done properly etc the head amp option is at least as good as the SUT option... and of course much more flexible in cart matching etc;) I've no idea how this will turn out! :scratch: :eek: :)

[RothwellAudio]

...or buy yourself a kit for $49:
http://diyaudioprojects.com/Solid/JFET-MC-Pre-Preamp-Kit/
That is an extremely unsophisticated circuit and not very quiet.

[anubisgrau]

That is an extremely unsophisticated circuit and not very quiet.

it depends how you define quiet, if you mean any audible noise associated with the PSU and mains, it runs on batteries hence more quiet than anything you need to plug into a socket. it has other issues that batteries introduce but this circuit has been chewed over and over on diyaudio.com and there are much better variations within a price range - certainly under a $100 to get it go

of course, what paul hynes is doing is a completely different bag, he's a master of regulated supplies and ultimate PSs; not everyone is keen to recharge or exchange batteries every week or so.

if anyone really wants to be reassured what top SUTs do with top headamps, i can borrow some from my or my freinds' stash, such as tango MCT-999, tango NN600-50k, ortofon T-3000, cotter mkII. they have fiercely defeated a plenty of $$$$ headamps or active MC stages, inc pass XONO, pathos inthegroove, various SOTA DIY work etc. i personally don't waste my time on these tests anymore but everyone is welcome to do so. and btw any of these costs less than any of the reverend headamps out there. you can start with ortofon T-3000 which i think SJS sells for 600 pounds.

[Infinitely Baffled]

if anyone really wants to be reassured what top SUTs do with top headamps, i can borrow some from my or my freinds' stash, such as tango MCT-999, tango NN600-50k, ortofon T-3000, cotter mkII. they have fiercely defeated a plenty of $$$$ headamps or active MC stages

This may be true - or not, I don't know. But can't we have more moderate rhetoric, for heaven's sake? There seems to be something about online forums that brings out the suburban warrior in a lot of folks. It's not uncommon to read posts talking about how "my amp kills amp XZ", or "I heard a [insert name] system at a friend's house, and my system stamped all over it". It's a hobby for Pete's sake! Making comparisons is fine, and in fact it's a large part of what we like about forums. But we don't need playground warfare.
IB

[RothwellAudio]

it depends how you define quiet, if you mean any audible noise associated with the PSU and mains, it runs on batteries hence more quiet than anything you need to plug into a socket. it has other issues that batteries introduce but this circuit has been chewed over and over on diyaudio.com and there are much better variations within a price range - certainly under a $100 to get it go

of course, what paul hynes is doing is a completely different bag, he's a master of regulated supplies and ultimate PSs; not everyone is keen to recharge or exchange batteries every week or so.

What I had in mind was R1 in particular (on the circuit diagram visible in the link). What purpose does it serve other than to add noise to the signal? You could have the quietest power supply in the world and R1 would still be messing things up big time.

[RothwellAudio]

This may be true - or not, I don't know. But can't we have more moderate rhetoric, for heaven's sake? There seems to be something about online forums that brings out the suburban warrior in a lot of folks. It's not uncommon to read posts talking about how "my amp kills amp XZ", or "I heard a [insert name] system at a friend's house, and my system stamped all over it". It's a hobby for Pete's sake! Making comparisons is fine, and in fact it's a large part of what we like about forums. But we don't need playground warfare.
IB

I agree absolutely. I use hi-fi as a device for listening to music, not as a weapon to "stamp all over" somebody else's hi-fi. Of course the "shoot out" has been with us in many guises since caveman days but I would prefer to keep that attitude out of hi-fi.

[Infinitely Baffled]

I agree absolutely. I use hi-fi as a device for listening to music, not as a weapon to "stamp all over" somebody else's hi-fi. Of course the "shoot out" has been with us in many guises since caveman days but I would prefer to keep that attitude out of hi-fi.

Hi-Fi for swinging pacifists! Count me in! We should rename the "shoot-out" as the "side by side comparison". By the way, does anybody share my suspicion that instant back-to-back comparisons are not a helpful way of choosing hi-fi components? I remember back in the 70s going into Lasky's in Tottenham Court Road and you could have any speaker you wanted demonstrated to you. There was a whole wall chock-full of of different loudspeakers from different manufacturers, all being fed from the same source via a multi-way switch. So you could ask to hear Santana and get the salesman to switch to a different set of speakers at the end of every line. Absolutely bewildering! You learn nothing. You get an immediate ear-pop or sugar-rush from the impact of a new sound each time one cuts in, but the very experience of being bombarded with sharp contrasts in a short time space really makes meaningful appraisal impossible. You really need to have the piece of kit, whether loudspeaker or amp or whatever, available for continuing listening sessions over a decent period to be able to decide if you like it (much less love it!). Of course, that is difficult. Especially via a shop. We are lucky in that the manufacturers associated with forums mostly tend to offer extended loans of equipment for trialling at home. Far more helpful!
Sorry ... thread hi-jack. Just my two-penn'oth. Back to SUTs and head amps... !
IB

[montesquieu]

Just noticed that Alex has very kindly offered to lend Tom his MkI Arkless head amp! Go for it Tom and Alex:) You have nothing to lose in allowing a top quality head amp it's voice amongst amongst the many very high end SUT's you've tried.. not that top quality head amps are common.. bit of a niche product! Hence you can not have tried many....
I'm sure you will have the wherewithal to make up various loading plugs to experiment with your various cartridges Tom?......
This should be interesting! Yes there is a further improved MkII... and if I was to be selling one for the £1500 of the Paul Haynes model there would be things I'd be doing above even the MkII... Head amps are such a niche product that I don't expect to sell more than the odd one here and there, it's not my "bread and butter".. my only stake in this is as an engineer, to try and show that when done properly etc the head amp option is at least as good as the SUT option... and of course much more flexible in cart matching etc;) I've no idea how this will turn out! :scratch: :eek: :)

Probably need 100 ohm and 500 ohm .. though I would get a pretty good impression at just 100 ohm.

And no I'm not terribly skilled in the soldering iron department but you probably figured that out already :D

[sjs]

you can start with ortofon T-3000 which i think SJS sells for 600 pounds.

I do have an Ortofon T-3000 SUT (another toroidal core btw), along with a Kondo era AN JP SUT, AI S800, Jensen JT-34K-DX and Hashimoto HM-7. As I have Ortofon MC70 Anniversary and Audio Note IO carts, both of which are low impedance low output, it is hardly surprisingly that Ortofon and AN JP SUTs are the best matches for my carts. If you have a similar low impedance low output cart the T-3000 will be excellent, if your MC cart has higher impedance and output you may find the HM-7 preferable.

If we go back to the question asked by the OP, I would say that if you can get Tribute SUTs designed for your MC cart, then get them and you will not be disappointed.

[anubisgrau]

If we go back to the question asked by the OP, I would say that if you can get Tribute SUTs designed for your MC cart, then get them and you will not be disappointed.

Exactly, just as with some other top end manufacturers, such as Intact Audio who can wind a perfectly matched product for your favorite cartridge and is inexpensive (compared to how it sounds). I would also expect that Lundahl can do a custom job if you cant get an off shelf solution (though I would avoid their products for a direct comparison with top level head-amps, Lundahl SUTs actually sound too much like a head amp themselves ;) )

[Arkless Electronics]

Another step up option is of course the valve head amp. I made one and used it for a couple of years, 4 triodes in parallel per channel. VERY good sound but rather impractical for all but the really keen as only the lowest noise samples of valves available can be used.... A valve which seems totally quiet in an MM phono stage can hiss and crackle like hell when used in this sensitive an application! I got sick of trying to keep it in valves which were quiet enough in the end.... A good set could start to go off and produce rustling sounds etc sometimes in as little as a week or two after fitting them:eek:
I have heard that some disc seal microwave triodes can be much more reliable and quieter in this application but I haven't tried them myself, mine used 4 x ECC88.

It seems a non starter as a commercial product on the grounds that one cannot really sell a valve head amp to someone with the caveat that "although the unit itself is guaranteed for 10 years I can't guarantee the valves for even a week and you are on your own on the valve front"....

[mac72]

A valve which seems totally quiet in an MM phono stage can hiss and crackle like hell when used in this sensitive an application! I got sick of trying to keep it in valves which were quiet enough in the end.... A good set could start to go off and produce rustling sounds etc sometimes in as little as a week or two after fitting them:eek:

From my experience with Ecc88 keeping heater-cathode voltage fairly low helped to reduce all crackling and rustling noises to minimum , did you try to elevate heaters

[montesquieu]

Another step up option is of course the valve head amp. I made one and used it for a couple of years, 4 triodes in parallel per channel. VERY good sound but rather impractical for all but the really keen as only the lowest noise samples of valves available can be used.... A valve which seems totally quiet in an MM phono stage can hiss and crackle like hell when used in this sensitive an application! I got sick of trying to keep it in valves which were quiet enough in the end.... A good set could start to go off and produce rustling sounds etc sometimes in as little as a week or two after fitting them:eek:
I have heard that some disc seal microwave triodes can be much more reliable and quieter in this application but I haven't tried them myself, mine used 4 x ECC88.

It seems a non starter as a commercial product on the grounds that one cannot really sell a valve head amp to someone with the caveat that "although the unit itself is guaranteed for 10 years I can't guarantee the valves for even a week and you are on your own on the valve front"....

You just reminded me, I had an Audion two-box valve head amp for a while, pricey it was too ... gain was high on it but my word it was dynamic.

Just as you say though Jez it was noisy (hiss rather than rustle) but to be fair I think part of that was due to the sheer amount of gain it was pushing.

[Arkless Electronics]

From my experience with Ecc88 keeping heater-cathode voltage fairly low helped to reduce all crackling and rustling noises to minimum , did you try to elevate heaters

Heater to cathode was just a couple of volts... it wasn't cascoded.

[Barry]

....... But can't we have more moderate rhetoric, for heaven's sake? There seems to be something about online forums that brings out the suburban warrior in a lot of folks. It's not uncommon to read posts talking about how "my amp kills amp XZ", or "I heard a [insert name] system at a friend's house, and my system stamped all over it". It's a hobby for Pete's sake! Making comparisons is fine, and in fact it's a large part of what we like about forums. But we don't need playground warfare.
IB

Thoroughly agree with you there Gary.

We all hear differently - my ears are not the same as yours, and we all have different priorities with what we want from our systems: tonal accuracy, dynamics, transparancy, lack of colouration, leading edge attack, 'black' silences, 'atmosphere', 'air', lack of grain, resolution of low level detail, 'musicality', accurate soundstaging, focus, etc. etc. .... . How we get there will obviously vary from one system to another, depending on those priorities - there is no one system that gets it all right It's all a matter of taste, not of being 'right or wrong'.

Whenever I read a strongly worded post of the kind you mentioned, I always mentally prefix it with the words "in my opinion", as that is exactly what it is - an opinion.

[Arkless Electronics]

You just reminded me, I had an Audion two-box valve head amp for a while, pricey it was too ... gain was high on it but my word it was dynamic.

Just as you say though Jez it was noisy (hiss rather than rustle) but to be fair I think part of that was due to the sheer amount of gain it was pushing.

Ahhhh... the opposite in fact ;) As it's so hissy, the gain needs to be pushed up to make sure that at the volume control setting you are using in practice, the volume is high enough that you don't get bothered by the hiss :)

very low noise electronics is tricky but rewarding and gain structure is very important here. Your valve head amp would have been almost certainly a single stage topology and basically it is not going to amplify its own noise too much... so we are left with a set amount of noise present.. the more we can amplify the signal to be above this noise floor, the greater the signal to noise ratio. Hence also why my MC only phono stges can give much lower noise still compared to my best stand alone head amps going into a MM stage... all gain structure ;)

[Arkless Electronics]

Thoroughly agree with you there Gary.

We all hear differently - my ears are not the same as yours, and we all have different priorities with what we want from our systems: tonal accuracy, dynamics, transparancy, lack of colouration, leading edge attack, 'black' silences, 'atmosphere', 'air', lack of grain, resolution of low level detail, 'musicality', accurate soundstaging, focus, etc. etc. .... . How we get there will obviously vary from one system to another, depending on those priorities - there is no one system that gets it all right It's all a matter of taste, not of being 'right or wrong'.

Whenever I read a strongly worded post of the kind you mentioned, I always mentally prefix it with the words "in my opinion", as that is exactly what it is - an opinion.

Good post...

[farflungstar]

How would anyone compare a top line Paul Hynes custom build to going the SUT route. After speaking to him he could build specifically for the shilabe....
Weighing up options...
Adey

In perpetual pursuit.

[Arkless Electronics]

How would anyone compare a top line Paul Hynes custom build to going the SUT route. After speaking to him he could build specifically for the shilabe....
Weighing up options...
Adey

In perpetual pursuit.

Well that's a bit deflating.... after the amount of input I've put into the thread in trying to vindicate head amps as a suitable rival for SUT's at the top level.... Anyhow mine is suitable for the Shilabe as well and half the price :ner: :) Not that there is anything out of the ordinary about the shilabe to require a head amp to be customised to it according to the specs... pretty standard 0.24mV output (a bit lower than the average but still in the "normal" range) and 16 Ohms internal resistance .... I guess at least if I've piqued interest in high end head amps in general it's a start:)

I will say both that Marco did prefer the Hynes (which I'm sure is superb) to mine after trying them both and bought one, (in a long review over the phone from Marco he said mine was the best head amp he'd ever heard,,, until he tried the Hynes about a week later) but also, in defence of my offering, it was the MkI that Marco tried and before it had had further upgrades fitted. Also that, at half the Hynes £1500 price, mine was not fitted with boutique parts etc and so there would be more to come from it there no doubt ;)

[anubisgrau]

How would anyone compare a top line Paul Hynes custom build to going the SUT route. After speaking to him he could build specifically for the shilabe....
Weighing up options...
Adey

In perpetual pursuit.

Do what a manufacturer of your cartridge says. They certainly know better, especially than those who have probably never heard the one.

[farflungstar]

Arkless, without your input and knowledge and the follow up posts to your own I would never have given serious thought to head amps. I hadn't even bothered to read up on them properly because I hate components in a signal path.

Because I'm not rich whenever I decide to upgrade I look at the best on offer and those a tier or so down the chain. I research them, weigh up all the comments, try to find common themes, then decide which is worth skinting myself for, or not.

In this case, the soon to arrive Shilabe cart, I've actually taken a punt in the sense that to equal or beat my current cart which works beautifully with my phonostage, it will need to be very special indeed. This makes choosing the right SUT/head amp very important if a fair comparison is to be made.

There's every possibility that I'll go for the Miyajima SUT which matches the shilabe, but Tom's opinion is that it can be beat and so I need to think about that. However I'm aware that toms ears and system are toms and what he might criticise I might not.

In a nutshell the Hashimotos HM7s are affordable but come naked and I'm not that great at soldering (TT building yes ). And they aren't tailored to cart.

The Tribute can be bought ready built but not tailored to cart. They are however very well priced, and well built.

The Slagle is reasonably priced naked but waaay expensive when boxed, but they can be tailored to the cart.

The Miyajima is expensive, but looks great and is built around the shilabe.

The Rothwell is, I think, built to a price and can't be tailored.

The Paul Hynes is top of the heap of modern head amps though it's a little industrial in design. Its expensive but can be tailored to my cart. Paul is also recognised as truly knowing his shit with power supplies.

The Arkless is built to a price and no doubt shines at that price - but without hearing and comparing it with the Paul Hynes or any of the SUTs I can't say whether it's better, equal or worse. So my judgement has to be based on the assumption that it's built to a price.

I read one of your posts where you said that no one would pay more than £750 for one of your head amps - as it stands i would agree - but a substantially upgraded, cost no object offering would I'm sure find a market. I'm in that market.

However please don't think that I'm only interested in something that costs mega bucks. When faced with upgrading my Slagle autoformer volume to either his silver version at just shy of £2500 and the rather handmade the Truth at less than £1000 I chose the latter - based on its merit and not it's price.

Adey


In perpetual pursuit.

[sjs]

There are those on here who can box up the naked SUTs you mention into nice boxes. There are several examples dotted about. I am currently building some HM-7 SUTs into a case to match a preamp.

[anubisgrau]

The Tribute can be bought ready built but not tailored to cart.

really? is this something new? peter used to tailor his SUTs to your cart, just send him a model.

[Arkless Electronics]

Arkless, without your input and knowledge and the follow up posts to your own I would never have given serious thought to head amps. I hadn't even bothered to read up on them properly because I hate components in a signal path.

Because I'm not rich whenever I decide to upgrade I look at the best on offer and those a tier or so down the chain. I research them, weigh up all the comments, try to find common themes, then decide which is worth skinting myself for, or not.

In this case, the soon to arrive Shilabe cart, I've actually taken a punt in the sense that to equal or beat my current cart which works beautifully with my phonostage, it will need to be very special indeed. This makes choosing the right SUT/head amp very important if a fair comparison is to be made.

There's every possibility that I'll go for the Miyajima SUT which matches the shilabe, but Tom's opinion is that it can be beat and so I need to think about that. However I'm aware that toms ears and system are toms and what he might criticise I might not.

In a nutshell the Hashimotos HM7s are affordable but come naked and I'm not that great at soldering (TT building yes ). And they aren't tailored to cart.

The Tribute can be bought ready built but not tailored to cart. They are however very well priced, and well built.

The Slagle is reasonably priced naked but waaay expensive when boxed, but they can be tailored to the cart.

The Miyajima is expensive, but looks great and is built around the shilabe.

The Rothwell is, I think, built to a price and can't be tailored.

The Paul Hynes is top of the heap of modern head amps though it's a little industrial in design. Its expensive but can be tailored to my cart. Paul is also recognised as truly knowing his shit with power supplies.

The Arkless is built to a price and no doubt shines at that price - but without hearing and comparing it with the Paul Hynes or any of the SUTs I can't say whether it's better, equal or worse. So my judgement has to be based on the assumption that it's built to a price.

I read one of your posts where you said that no one would pay more than £750 for one of your head amps - as it stands i would agree - but a substantially upgraded, cost no object offering would I'm sure find a market. I'm in that market.

However please don't think that I'm only interested in something that costs mega bucks. When faced with upgrading my Slagle autoformer volume to either his silver version at just shy of £2500 and the rather handmade the Truth at less than £1000 I chose the latter - based on its merit and not it's price.

Adey


In perpetual pursuit.

Yer can't argue with a quality reply like that! :)

[farflungstar]

I spoke with Pieter, he can supply ready built with dip switches for loading which I don't want - maybe I misread him...
Adey

In perpetual pursuit.

[RothwellAudio]

Not that there is anything out of the ordinary about the shilabe to require a head amp to be customised to it according to the specs... pretty standard 0.24mV output (a bit lower than the average but still in the "normal" range) and 16 Ohms internal resistance ....
Absolutely correct. There's nothing about that cartridge which requires anything out of the ordinary. Anyone claiming to make something specially "matched" to that cartridge is at least stretching the truth.



There's every possibility that I'll go for the Miyajima SUT which matches the shilabe...

The Tribute can be bought ready built but not tailored to cart...

The Slagle is reasonably priced naked but waaay expensive when boxed, but they can be tailored to the cart.

The Miyajima is expensive, but looks great and is built around the shilabe.

The Rothwell is, I think, built to a price and can't be tailored.


There's really not much matching to be done for the Shilabe. For a step-up transformer I would recommend a turns ratio of 1:20, but 1:10 or anything in the range 1:10 - 1:20 would be fine.
Tailoring the primary inductance would be a possibility for anyone who does their own winding, but I doubt that anyone claiming to match the transformer to the cartridge is actually doing that.

I'm not sure what you mean by "the Rothwell". I sell several step-up transformers, one of which would be ideal for the Shilabe, and I can make adjustments if you want them. I also sell a headamp which has four gain settings and eight load impedance settings and it too would work very well with the Shilabe. True, they are "made to a price" - or at least a lot more affordable than some of the gear on the market - but don't be seduced by the idea that a higher price automatically translates into a better product.

[farflungstar]

I've read your wonderful write up about step ups, and think I came away from it knowing a heck of a lot more. Thank you. I think your model is the MCL?

I promise I won't be seduced by price, if I came across lots of opinions from people with similar systems saying great things about a 200£ product I'd jump on it (wouldn't we all) but the hashimotos seem to get universal acclaim, as does the astronomically priced AN suts. If I was in the UK I'd have both yours and the arkless round for a listen - but here I have to buy based on careful research and something of a gamble.

All and any input is gratefully received.
Adey


In perpetual pursuit.

[RothwellAudio]

...the hashimotos seem to get universal acclaim, as does the astronomically priced AN suts.

I have no experience of Hashimoto transformers but my experience of Audio Note transformers didn't leave me particularly impressed.

[farflungstar]

I personally think there is maybe more snob appeal than truth in the popularity of the top line AN gear - though their speakers are lovely - in my set up at least.

Where are you based?
Adey

In perpetual pursuit.

[RothwellAudio]

BTW, I found this on the Miyajima Labs website:

Numerical value of InputCoil and OutputCoil is winding amount of the coils.
Please choose the winding amount of InputCoil suitable for the impedance of the cartridge.

Input Coil
80 = 2-5 Ω
120 = 5-12 Ω
180 = 12-30 Ω
270 = 30-100 Ω

Numerical value of the output coil is winding amount of the coils.
Please choose the appropriate numerical value to decide an amplification rate.
For example, it is the amplification of 22.2 times when a user chooses Input180 Output4000 for a cartridge of 16 Ω.
The output impedance switch changes the impedance of the phonostage.
The calculation methods of Impedance are as follows.

22.2 times x 22.2 times x cartridge 16 Ω = 7,885 Ω = 7.885 kΩ

Therefore, please choose the impedance from 8k ohm to 47k ohm.

In the case of MM cartridge, please choose PASS as both InputCoil and OutputCoil.
In addition, please choose 47kΩ(PASS) as Impedance basically.

There's some worrying stuff there, but I haven't got time to go into it all now. I'll come back to it.

[Ammonite Audio]

That is for the ETR-Stereo SUT with multiple gain and loading adjustments. On the other hand, the Miyajima ETR-KSW stereo SUT is simply designed for their stereo cartridges.

[Barry]

BTW, I found this on the Miyajima Labs website:

Numerical value of InputCoil and OutputCoil is winding amount of the coils.
Please choose the winding amount of InputCoil suitable for the impedance of the cartridge.

Input Coil
80 = 2-5 Ω
120 = 5-12 Ω
180 = 12-30 Ω
270 = 30-100 Ω

Numerical value of the output coil is winding amount of the coils.
Please choose the appropriate numerical value to decide an amplification rate.
For example, it is the amplification of 22.2 times when a user chooses Input180 Output4000 for a cartridge of 16 Ω.
The output impedance switch changes the impedance of the phonostage.
The calculation methods of Impedance are as follows.

22.2 times x 22.2 times x cartridge 16 Ω = 7,885 Ω = 7.885 kΩ

Therefore, please choose the impedance from 8k ohm to 47k ohm.

In the case of MM cartridge, please choose PASS as both InputCoil and OutputCoil.
In addition, please choose 47kΩ(PASS) as Impedance basically.

There's some worrying stuff there, but I haven't got time to go into it all now. I'll come back to it.

Reads like badly-translated Japanese: I don't quite know what they are talking about. :scratch:

[farflungstar]

It is badly translated Japanese lol. I would love to edit their website!
Adey

In perpetual pursuit.

[RothwellAudio]

Apologies if this post is a bit long but I'd like to state some engineering facts and dispel some myths.
Firstly, cartridge loading.
It's rare to see a cartridge manufacturer state a specific load requirement for their cartridges. Sometimes a wide range is specified but more commonly a lower limit is specified. So what effect do different loads have? If we assume the cartridge's coil to be a pure resistance the only effect the load has is to act in conjunction with the source impedance and form a potential divider which attenuates the signal. It does not alter the frequency response. In reality the cartridge's coils will have some inductance and a more sophisticated analysis will take that into account. However, the inductance is so small that it affects only ultrasonic frequencies and the simple potential divider effects of the load still apply in the audio band. So what should the load impedance be? The rule of thumb is that the load impedance should be ten times the source impedance because that results in attenuating the signal by less than 1dB. A higher load impedance will attenuate the signal even less than that, but 1dB is normally considered an acceptable loss. For comparison a load impedance equal to the source impedance will produce a 6dB loss and a load impedance three times the source impedance will produce a 2.5dB loss.

How should the load be applied? The answer is quite simple: put it in across the source. You would think that is obvious and needs no more explanation. That's the way it is done in all active circuits and no-one questions it, but when it comes to using a step-up transformer a myth has appeared that the load should not be across the source but should be across the output of the transformer, ie in parallel with the transformer's secondary winding. Why? Although there are many websites advocating the use of a resistive load in parallel with the secondary winding of a step-up transformer there is never any explanation given as to why the load should be there. The truth is that it need not be there and should not be there if the aim is to load the cartridge. It may be true that a load on the secondary side of a transformer has a loading effect on the cartridge, but it has a loading effect on the transformer too and combining the the two effects into one only complicates things and makes it impossible to deal with the two loading effects independently.

What are the effects of loading the transformer? A resistive load on the secondary of a step-up transformer damps high frequency ringing, but it also affects the load seen by the cartridge and causes more energy to be passed through the transformer core in the same way more energy is passed through the core of a mains transformer when a greater load is placed on it. Surely no-one would would entertain the idea of dropping a mains transformer's output by loading it excessively, yet a similar thing happens when attempting to load an MC step-up transformer with a resistive load. If the aim is to control high frequency ringing a much better way is to use a snubber network. This isn't an unknown technique in the wider world of audio and its use can be seen in microphone preamps and elsewhere. It's also common for transformer manufacturers to specify a snubber network for use with their audio transformers. For some strange reason the technique seems to have eluded most of the suppliers of audiophile LOMC step-up transformers.
A resistive load on the secondary can have the effect of producing more bass but it's really a case of attenuating the mid and high frequencies rather than increasing the bass and again it's an effect on the transformer rather than effect on the cartridge itself.

The Miyajima Labs ETR-Stereo transformer:
Looking at this step-up transformer specifically, it has a facility for adding capacitance across its input with the claim that the capacitance will roll-off the cartridge's high frequencies. In reality the capacitance will produce a resonant peak before roll-off and I would advise against applying a capacitance load to a cartridge.
The transformer also has a selector switch for choosing the number of turns of wire on primary and another for choosing the number of turns on the secondary. This allows turns ratios between 1:3.7 and 1:100 to be chosen. That's a very wide range and suggests that the unit is not designed specifically as the ideal partner for Miyajima cartridges but an attempt to accommodate all cartridges available anywhere. However, I'd estimate that 80% of the cartridges on the market don't need anything above 1:20 or anything below 1:10.
Finally, the unit has a switch to select different resistive loads for the transformer's secondary winding. As explained above, resistive loading of the transformer is not a good idea and not a clever way to load a cartridge.
For these reasons and the fact that absolutely no performance specifications are given, I do not think the Miyajima Labs ETR-Stereo is designed specifically for their cartridges and its design does not inspire confidence in me.

So what would I recommend for a cartridge with a 16 ohm source impedance and an output of 0.24mV? In general terms rather than any specific manufacturer's offering, I would recommend a transformer with a turns ratio in the range 1:10 to 1:20. A turns ratio of 1:10 would yield an output of 2.3mV and a load impedance of 470 ohms. A 1:20 turns ratio would yield an output of 4.2mV and a load impedance of 117 ohms. If a lower load impedance is preferred for whatever reason I would advocate using load resistors on the primary side of the transformer - not the secondary - bearing in mind that an extra load will reduce the signal voltage into the MM phonostage.
If the absolute maximum voltage from the transformer is required the optimum turns ratio would be 1:54 and would yield a voltage of 6.5mV. However, higher turns ratios usually result in less bandwidth and more ringing and I seriously doubt there would be any real benefit in aiming for maximum voltage rather than maximum fidelity. Personally I would choose a ratio of 1:20.

BTW, Ammonite Acoustics has pointed out that the ETR-Stereo isn't designed specifically for Miyajima cartridges, but others in the range are.

[Arkless Electronics]

Apologies if this post is a bit long but I'd like to state some engineering facts and dispel some myths.
Firstly, cartridge loading.
It's rare to see a cartridge manufacturer state a specific load requirement for their cartridges. Sometimes a wide range is specified but more commonly a lower limit is specified. So what effect do different loads have? If we assume the cartridge's coil to be a pure resistance the only effect the load has is to act in conjunction with the source impedance and form a potential divider which attenuates the signal. It does not alter the frequency response. In reality the cartridge's coils will have some inductance and a more sophisticated analysis will take that into account. However, the inductance is so small that it affects only ultrasonic frequencies and the simple potential divider effects of the load still apply in the audio band. So what should the load impedance be? The rule of thumb is that the load impedance should be ten times the source impedance because that results in attenuating the signal by less than 1dB. A higher load impedance will attenuate the signal even less than that, but 1dB is normally considered an acceptable loss. For comparison a load impedance equal to the source impedance will produce a 6dB loss and a load impedance three times the source impedance will produce a 2.5dB loss.

How should the load be applied? The answer is quite simple: put it in across the source. You would think that is obvious and needs no more explanation. That's the way it is done in all active circuits and no-one questions it, but when it comes to using a step-up transformer a myth has appeared that the load should not be across the source but should be across the output of the transformer, ie in parallel with the transformer's secondary winding. Why? Although there are many websites advocating the use of a resistive load in parallel with the secondary winding of a step-up transformer there is never any explanation given as to why the load should be there. The truth is that it need not be there and should not be there if the aim is to load the cartridge. It may be true that a load on the secondary side of a transformer has a loading effect on the cartridge, but it has a loading effect on the transformer too and combining the the two effects into one only complicates things and makes it impossible to deal with the two loading effects independently.

What are the effects of loading the transformer? A resistive load on the secondary of a step-up transformer damps high frequency ringing, but it also affects the load seen by the cartridge and causes more energy to be passed through the transformer core in the same way more energy is passed through the core of a mains transformer when a greater load is placed on it. Surely no-one would would entertain the idea of dropping a mains transformer's output by loading it excessively, yet a similar thing happens when attempting to load an MC step-up transformer with a resistive load. If the aim is to control high frequency ringing a much better way is to use a snubber network. This isn't an unknown technique in the wider world of audio and its use can be seen in microphone preamps and elsewhere. It's also common for transformer manufacturers to specify a snubber network for use with their audio transformers. For some strange reason the technique seems to have eluded most of the suppliers of audiophile LOMC step-up transformers.
A resistive load on the secondary can have the effect of producing more bass but it's really a case of attenuating the mid and high frequencies rather than increasing the bass and again it's an effect on the transformer rather than effect on the cartridge itself.

The Miyajima Labs ETR-Stereo transformer:
Looking at this step-up transformer specifically, it has a facility for adding capacitance across its input with the claim that the capacitance will roll-off the cartridge's high frequencies. In reality the capacitance will produce a resonant peak before roll-off and I would advise against applying a capacitance load to a cartridge.
The transformer also has a selector switch for choosing the number of turns of wire on primary and another for choosing the number of turns on the secondary. This allows turns ratios between 1:3.7 and 1:100 to be chosen. That's a very wide range and suggests that the unit is not designed specifically as the ideal partner for Miyajima cartridges but an attempt to accommodate all cartridges available anywhere. However, I'd estimate that 80% of the cartridges on the market don't need anything above 1:20 or anything below 1:10.
Finally, the unit has a switch to select different resistive loads for the transformer's secondary winding. As explained above, resistive loading of the transformer is not a good idea and not a clever way to load a cartridge.
For these reasons and the fact that absolutely no performance specifications are given, I do not think the Miyajima Labs ETR-Stereo is designed specifically for their cartridges and its design does not inspire confidence in me.

So what would I recommend for a cartridge with a 16 ohm source impedance and an output of 0.24mV? In general terms rather than any specific manufacturer's offering, I would recommend a transformer with a turns ratio in the range 1:10 to 1:20. A turns ratio of 1:10 would yield an output of 2.3mV and a load impedance of 470 ohms. A 1:20 turns ratio would yield an output of 4.2mV and a load impedance of 117 ohms. If a lower load impedance is preferred for whatever reason I would advocate using load resistors on the primary side of the transformer - not the secondary - bearing in mind that an extra load will reduce the signal voltage into the MM phonostage.
If the absolute maximum voltage from the transformer is required the optimum turns ratio would be 1:54 and would yield a voltage of 6.5mV. However, higher turns ratios usually result in less bandwidth and more ringing and I seriously doubt there would be any real benefit in aiming for maximum voltage rather than maximum fidelity. Personally I would choose a ratio of 1:20.

BTW, Ammonite Acoustics has pointed out that the ETR-Stereo isn't designed specifically for Miyajima cartridges, but others in the range are.

"careful now", "down with that sort of thing" :D

Good post :)

[farflungstar]

Thanks for that Dave (hope I've got your name right). I wouldn't go for the Miyajima you're discussing - my interest is in the KSW which is specifically for the Shilabe and Kansui, or the best quality at 1:10/1:20


Adey

In perpetual pursuit.

[Mike Adams]

Cut and pasted from my emails with Noriyuki Miyajima

'16 Ω of ETR-KSW writing in the website is real input impedance. (phonostage of the 47k load)
I produced many stepup transformers, but found that I could not make a good sound only at the ratio.
The ratio and coil width and the number of times and the materials have a big influence on sound quality.
I produced a large number of stepup transformers to look for the stepup transformer which was most suitable for a cartridge of Miyajima-lab.
The stepup transformer which gave my ideal sound quality is ETR-KSW.
ETR-KSW is suitable for all cartridges of Miyajima-lab.'

[farflungstar]

Thanks Mike. I'm hoping to go the KSW route, and your input is invaluable.

Adey

In perpetual pursuit.

[farflungstar]

Update. I've just bought this HM-X Hashimoto SUT from fellow member nestor. It marks, I'm sure, the beginning of my SUT/head amp adventure and am looking forward to hearing it - Spanish customs withstanding!

The HM-X is just below the HM-7 in price, and shares the same ratios. They have a different response being 15hz-100khz versus 10hz-80khz but I've high hopes of them.

Will report.


http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w483/farflungstar/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20170205_142654_631_zpspgonrvga.jpg

http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w483/farflungstar/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20170205_142631_596_zpsejbdoxiu.jpg

In perpetual pursuit.

[Ali Tait]

Not heard that one but have had an HM-3. Great sound, just didn't suit my cart.

[anubisgrau]

This is the best cased SUT I have ever seen in person - done by the same guy who cased my Tangos, just that he mastered his skills to enormous perfection. I had this HM-X at my place, a very decent stuff, especially for the money.

[anubisgrau]

newbie in da house!

https://www.hi-files.com/forum/uploads/monthly_2018_11/45129557_246858842652195_3690734838484041728_n.jpg .28e0acceeb5b7ce4c9778f37151bb544.jpg

[Ali Tait]

Nice!

[Rosewind]

A few months back, I was in touch with a Danish seller who said that the SUT he made was based on the Tribute - using the same materials and techniques. Perhaps I will test it in my system when I get my Benz Micro Gullwing SLR back from a rebuild.