Van den Hul The Grail vs TRilogy 907

[Rosewind]

I have spent a few hours listening to individual tracks through a Van den Hul The Grail and a Trilogy 907 in order to get a feel for the two units. I used a meter to level match within 1 db and I attached both units to my preamp buffer (Pass B1). The delay when switching was 30 seconds because I had no mute button and had to switch the tt cables from one unit to the other. That was as good as it gets.

I think I can detect more of a rough edge to bass guitar twangs in "Nice'n'Sleazy" (the Stranglers) and to drums in general through the Trilogy 907 than through the more polished (polite?) Van den Hul the Grail. Otherwise they are very close. I loaded the Benz Gullwing SLR with 1k ohms on the Trilogy 907 - better to my ears than at 400 ohms. The Grail has automatic loading.

As I had detected very little between the two, I asked my oldest daughter to come and listen to a track, Yazoo's, "Nobody's Diary" through both phono stages. She could barely tell them apart and refused to choose between them. She liked the music, though.

In the afternoon she preferred The Grail on another track, but at that time I used the 400 ohm load on the Trilogy 907.

I know about expection bias - which would have the Grail win out - on the other hand I suppose I really want the "cheaper" option to be so good that I will not mind letting the Grail go.

The next round tomorrow will focus on human voices.

Today the verdict is: I can live equally well with either unit. That sort of ties in with the conclusion of a Norwegian forum test of the Trilogy 907 where the user failed to detect any drawbacks to the Trilogy 907 compared to an EAR 324 and his own (modded) phono stage.

I have a Partridge 977 SUT but I have had no luck with it through quite many mm stages: EAR 802 (onboard), Croft Riia R and the onboard mm riaa in the Pass B1 buffer. I also tested the Partridge 977 with the Grail for about 15 seconds, and had the same dull and uninspired result.

Edit: oh and before anyone asks - absolutely zero HUM.

[Bigman80]

I have spent a few hours listening to individual tracks through a Van den Hul The Grail and a Trilogy 907 in order to get a feel for the two units. I used a meter to level match within 1 db and I attached both units to my preamp buffer (Pass B1). The delay when switching was 30 seconds because I had no mute button and had to switch the tt cables from one unit to the other. That was as good as it gets.

I think I can detect more of a rough edge to bass guitar twangs in "Nice'n'Sleazy" (the Stranglers) and to drums in general through the Trilogy 907 than through the more polished (polite?) Van den Hul the Grail. Otherwise they are very close. I loaded the Benz Gullwing SLR with 1k ohms on the Trilogy 907 - better to my ears than at 400 ohms. The Grail has automatic loading.

As I had detected very little between the two, I asked my oldest daughter to come and listen to a track, Yazoo's, "Nobody's Diary" through both phono stages. She could barely tell them apart and refused to choose between them. She liked the music, though.

In the afternoon she preferred The Grail on another track, but at that time I used the 400 ohm load on the Trilogy 907.

I know about expection bias - which would have the Grail win out - on the other hand I suppose I really want the "cheaper" option to be so good that I will not mind letting the Grail go.

The next round tomorrow will focus on human voices.

Today the verdict is: I can live equally well with either unit. That sort of ties in with the conclusion of a Norwegian forum test of the Trilogy 907 where the user failed to detect any drawbacks to the Trilogy 907 compared to an EAR 324 and his own (modded) phono stage.

I have a Partridge 977 SUT but I have had no luck with it through quite many mm stages: EAR 802 (onboard), Croft Riia R and the onboard mm riaa in the Pass B1 buffer. I also tested the Partridge 977 with the Grail for about 15 seconds, and had the same dull and uninspired result.

Edit: oh and before anyone asks - absolutely zero HUM.

Very interesting.

Ive heard a 907 a few times, in very competent systems and I have to say, to read your opinion that "the Grail" and the 907 sound very similar, I am completely certain I'll not look for an audition of "the Grail" lol.

I am surprised by your findings but as we all know, HiFi is a strange beast.

[Rosewind]

Well, I may have cloth ears for all I know. I admit that I do not have the perfect auditioning circumstances, but I am really only interested in finding out which phono stage is best for ME. It is also a matter of system matching / system synergy, I am sure, including whatever bias I am inclined to have. For instance, I also remember my Denon 103R + Naim Prefix with hicap clone fondly.

I am sighing with relief that I have finally found great sound with my Benz Gullwing SLR. (Partridge 977) SUT + Benz Micro Gullwing = no go in my book.

[Bigman80]

Well, I may have cloth ears for all I know. I admit that I do not have the perfect auditioning circumstances, but I am really only interested in finding out which phono stage is best for ME. It is also a matter of system matching / system synergy, I am sure, including whatever bias I am inclined to have. For instance, I also remember my Denon 103R + Naim Prefix with hicap clone fondly.

I am sighing with relief that I have finally found great sound with my Benz Gullwing SLR. (Partridge 977) SUT + Benz Micro Gullwing = no go in my book.

Yep, and that's what you should be doing. If it works for you, it must be the right thing.

[montesquieu]

I don't think back to back listening necessarily resolves very much, certainly not with kit that's reasonably matched in terms of price/performance. Time gets consumed identifying differences in presentation and labelling them as 'better' or 'worse'. Too much of this you don't end up any further forward as it becomes an intellectual exercise, with added pressure and confusion.

Put one in for a week without messing around and feel how you respond to it emotionally. Swap it round and do the same. Only compare after you've done this with both how often you did (or didn't) find yourself drawn to just sit and listen to the music, how curious you were to hear how x album sounded vs the last time you listened to it, how much fun you were having. Your guts will tell you the answer if you listen to them.

I've always felt the most satisfied with my conclusions when I've done comparisons this way. Where I haven't done it that way and have flogged stuff off (as I all too often have) to get my mits on the new and the sparkly (occasionally without auditioning first), that's when I end up later buying back stuff for a proper listen to make sure I've done the right thing. I've made quite a few changes of late and just about all of them have been done with careful evaluation over days and weeks, not an afternoon, where either you just end up unsure or (worse) where some characteristic jumps out and makes an impression, but that ultimately isn't the whole story.

Having said all that I'm rather surprised The Grail isn't doing more for you, I don't know the 906 but I had a Trilogy 907 a few years back and it wasn't a keeper, I would have expected The Grail with its LCR design to be streets ahead not just in technical sophisticiation but in what LCR phono stages in the main do beautifully which is fine detail (particularly inner voices or timbral accuracy), spatial cues like 3D placement, room acoustics, and so on. I've been using LCR stages for 6+ years now (Aurorasound Vida, EAR 912 and latterly Allnic H7000V) and have no plans to go back.

BTW I wouldn't expect the Partridge 977 to sound that great with the Benz, it needs a lot more than 1:6 step-up I would think, I'd be looking at 1:12-1:15 upwards.

[Bigman80]

I don't think back to back listening necessarily resolves very much, certainly not with kit that's reasonably matched in terms of price/performance. Time gets consumed identifying differences in presentation and labelling them as 'better' or 'worse'. Too much of this you don't end up any further forward as it becomes an intellectual exercise, with added pressure and confusion.

Put one in for a week without messing around and feel how you respond to it emotionally. Swap it round and do the same. Only compare after you've done this with both how often you did (or didn't) find yourself drawn to just sit and listen to the music, how curious you were to hear how x album sounded vs the last time you listened to it, how much fun you were having. Your guts will tell you the answer if you listen to them.

I've always felt the most satisfied with my conclusions when I've done comparisons this way. Where I haven't done it that way and have flogged stuff off (as I all too often have) to get my mits on the new and the sparkly (occasionally without auditioning first), that's when I end up later buying back stuff for a proper listen to make sure I've done the right thing. I've made quite a few changes of late and just about all of them have been done with careful evaluation over days and weeks, not an afternoon, where either you just end up unsure or (worse) where some characteristic jumps out and makes an impression, but that ultimately isn't the whole story.

Having said all that I'm rather surprised The Grail isn't doing more for you, I don't know the 906 but I had a Trilogy 907 a few years back and it wasn't a keeper, I would have expected The Grail with its LCR design to be streets ahead not just in technical sophisticiation but in what LCR phono stages in the main do beautifully which is fine detail (particularly inner voices or timbral accuracy), spatial cues like 3D placement, room acoustics, and so on. I've been using LCR stages for 6+ years now (Aurorasound Vida, EAR 912 and latterly Allnic H7000V) and have no plans to go back.

I'm with you tom. Having heard the performance Alan has managed to wring out of the badly flawed Lounge LCR and the much cheaper Valab i heard here, i am stunned it didn't put the 907 to the sword. But, our man here suggests he can't tell and thats ok.

Good on him. The Grail has to be worth a couple of grand to someone.

[Matt_J]

I wasn't that impressed with the 906 I had, no better/worse than a lot of the other stages I tried at or around a similar price point, including some much cheaper.

[Rosewind]

Well, as was pointed out on the Fishy forum, the Thorens TD147 Jubilee + arm may be the limiting factor. I will have to do some more listening through the Trilogy 907 phono stage over a few days, and then make the switch to the Van den Hul The Grail to see what happens.

I am surprised that I don't hear more of a difference, but there is a slight impression that the Grail is more coherent. On both occasions when I was standing outside the sweet spot of the Quad ESL 57s yesterday - behind my daughter - I sensed a better sound after the change to the Van den Hul the Grail. But that is probably just expectation bias.

[YNWaN]

The price of the 907 went up by nearly a thousand pounds when Trilogy decided to start using a separate UK distributor (most UK manufacturers handle their own distribution in their home country).

(I’m afraid I am also of the view that your turntable combo is a bottleneck in this situation).

[Rosewind]

When Troels Gravesen wrote about the Van den Hul The Grail he complained about the rather unpolished exterior and the lack of quality wiring in the psu for a 6600€ phono stage. My unit is a newer one than Troels' The Grail with a rearranged back panel. The fronts are the same.

If what you write about the Trilogy 907 is correct, the original sale price would have been 1700 - yes indeed, 1795£ according to a review in Hifi News from 2011. S/h price would then be closer to 900£ today for a unit that old. Hmm.

EDIT: Of course, people who bought the unit at the new higher price will be justified in wanting a higher price than 900£ and up.

No need to apologize for critising my tt + arm. I realize that the two are likely to be the limiting factors in my evaluation of the two phono stages.