What power cords are people using with their Io? I have Shunyata Anacondas and highly considering the new Shunyata Sigma NR V2. I don’t know if I need them, but, I guess mod fever. Anyone have listened to these new PCs with the Io?
Aesthetix Io Users Group
- Thread starter audioquest4life
- Start date
yes, i will try it at some point assuming that i don't eliminate the analog input if/when i add a second phono input. i don't yet know what that change costs or it's consequences.
it very well might turn out to be a perfect musical result running the MSB through the Io for either the headphones or the speakers.
I have the version with an Aux input, as well as one phono input. I don't quite see the point of different record players - why would I use the second best player / arm/ cartridge, or switch between the best and second best? - but thats just me. So one phono input is good enough for me. The aux input, on the other hand, is indispensable for using the Io (with volume) as preamp, if you want to listen to other sources beyond vinyl. I don't use it now, since I have a separate preamp, but over the years I often noticed that the aux input sounds good. In fact, it wasn't the quality of the aux input that made me invest in a separate line stage, it was the phono input, that improved with some more "juice" from the preamp.
In my audio log I find quotes from a 2005 Audiogon debate, where Albert Porter wrote: ""The Io is great but it does not perform nearly as well by itself as through the Callisto (or an ARC Ref)."
In my audio log I find quotes from a 2005 Audiogon debate, where Albert Porter wrote: ""The Io is great but it does not perform nearly as well by itself as through the Callisto (or an ARC Ref)."
Power cords and feet
In my system, the main electrical improvement was to get dedicated lines to the stereo in our living / listening room. This made a much larger change, than the various power cords I have tried, although these can contribute also. Good experience with Shunyata, Kimber, and others. However, for me, differences are much larger regarding tubes than power cords. So for example, partly for convenience (more outlets) I am using a
PS Audio Quintet. Does the Io sound better from this, or direct from the wall (dedicated line) outlets? Not sure. Maybe a bit plus and minus. Slightly more plus. So they have stayed there. I could test this more, once I have the best tube combination in place.
Feet / foundation - here, also, my situation is that "the basics" are in place, and the benefit of further feet, isolation and so on seems to be quite marginal. I have a very heavy rack with stone shelves, partly damped by me, by the wall in our solid wood floor construction (from 1928), and I have made two supports down in the cellar, struts supporting the listening room floor, so I can can jump in front of the turntable, without any problem or mistracking. Like the dedicated lines, this made a BIG difference.
So my message is to address the basics, and then go on from there. I have used Cerapucs under the Io, the results are good, but I would not call them dramatic, compared to the Io resting on my stone shelf on its stock feet. It is quite marginal. I have never tried the HRS feet. My rack space is somewhat confined, I cannot use high feet. But once more, I could re-test, with the best tube combination in place.
In my system, the main electrical improvement was to get dedicated lines to the stereo in our living / listening room. This made a much larger change, than the various power cords I have tried, although these can contribute also. Good experience with Shunyata, Kimber, and others. However, for me, differences are much larger regarding tubes than power cords. So for example, partly for convenience (more outlets) I am using a
PS Audio Quintet. Does the Io sound better from this, or direct from the wall (dedicated line) outlets? Not sure. Maybe a bit plus and minus. Slightly more plus. So they have stayed there. I could test this more, once I have the best tube combination in place.
Feet / foundation - here, also, my situation is that "the basics" are in place, and the benefit of further feet, isolation and so on seems to be quite marginal. I have a very heavy rack with stone shelves, partly damped by me, by the wall in our solid wood floor construction (from 1928), and I have made two supports down in the cellar, struts supporting the listening room floor, so I can can jump in front of the turntable, without any problem or mistracking. Like the dedicated lines, this made a BIG difference.
So my message is to address the basics, and then go on from there. I have used Cerapucs under the Io, the results are good, but I would not call them dramatic, compared to the Io resting on my stone shelf on its stock feet. It is quite marginal. I have never tried the HRS feet. My rack space is somewhat confined, I cannot use high feet. But once more, I could re-test, with the best tube combination in place.
Last edited:
You will loose your line input if you have a second phono input added Mike, the volume is also not remote controlled. I use mine into a SS preamp, i prefer the drive of this compared to directly into my SS amps. If i had a all tube system i might prefer directly
Line input = Aux input, on the Io, in my post above.
I have an all tube system, preferring the Io through a preamp. It is not night and day though. Some plus some minus. The Io on its own, with a phono AND line input, with volume, so it can function both as phono stage and as preamp, seems the best value. Unless you can get it with 2 phono inputs, plus a 3rd aux / line input. If the answer is no, I would drop the idea of a secondary phono input.
I have an all tube system, preferring the Io through a preamp. It is not night and day though. Some plus some minus. The Io on its own, with a phono AND line input, with volume, so it can function both as phono stage and as preamp, seems the best value. Unless you can get it with 2 phono inputs, plus a 3rd aux / line input. If the answer is no, I would drop the idea of a secondary phono input.
talked to Glenn, doing the 2nd phono input, losing the analog input. this will give me lots of phono options.
I agree that your foundational tweaks for your audio system, or any audio system, for that matter, make a difference. I also have learned through years of gained experiences that these foundational tweaks make a profound difference in many different ways.
Room: Custom designed room on concrete slab (Built to specification from my government experience working on and accrediting "quiet rooms". I do not like over damped rooms, the ones with carpet all over the place, or sound absorbing wall and ceiling tile. Maybe, I am jaded from working in similar environments for so many years, LOL. I much prefer bamboo or wood floors on top of the concrete with spot placement of throw rugs. I also prefer stone walls behind the speakers to create natural diffusion, and spot treat the side walls with combinations of absorbers and diffusors to recreate a more lively experience.
Power: 5 dedicated 20 amp circuits. Carbon fiber outlet covers with Furutech rhodium plugs. Experimented with other plugs, gold silver, copper, etc., the rhodium sounds best. I may experiment again in the future. The Amps, analog sources, and subs (when I used to use them) all on their own circuits.
Racks: Custom designed and filled with sand from Copulare platforms Germany. Note: Been exploring Silent Running Audio Ohio XL amp stands for my amps and platforms for the Io.
Turntable Rack: Clearaudio MontBlanc, 275 plus pounds of mass for the Transrotor Apollon TMD turntable
Isolation feet: Tried them on the Io, preamp, and amps, did not like. The sound became sterile. I think is a very subjective experience. Either you like it or not. Too much can be a bad thing as my ears told me.
Also, the foundation that my equipment sits on and the heavy racks aid in overall vibrational control. I think the concrete slab is the greatest contributor of vibration mitigation as it relates to the equipment in my situation, with the racks being additive.
Note: The Io Eclipse or partial Eclipse has audiophile Harmonic Resolution Systems (HRS) footers, which I deem just enough for my tastes.
It seems you and I have had similar paths and experiences in order to extract the best sound from our equipment.
Last edited:
I find it very interesting that many experiences in this forum tend towards similar goals, and partly, methods. Added value.
With an extremely puristic precision instrument like the Aesthetix Io, everything "else" becomes all the more important. We are trying to focus on a moon of Jupiter, metaphorically speaking. It is like having a big telescope - like my Meade ETX125EC. Unless this is very well grounded, with a totally stable foundation, I will never get a sharp image of Jupiter, not to speak of the Io moon.
So yes, two factors, the room and the electricity, play a main role. Unless this is right, what you will get is a "blurred" or suboptimal focus, and the Io is not functioning as well as it can.
In some ways I envy those with a listening room with a concrete floor, rather than a wood floor, like I have. And concrete walls and roof can be good also. I will never forget - ca 1985 - when I setup my Bose 901 speakers with a concrete wall, rather than the wood walls I was used to, behind them. This was much better, I was amazed. On the other hand, too much concrete may not be the best thing. Wood often seems to sound nice. Only it should not vibrate. To avoid that, I have installed two struts in the cellar, close to the stereo rack in the living room above. I used some thick planks, with some damping at the base and towards the plaster ceiling in the cellar, and a bit of brutal hammering to get the planks to take the load. You never know what works. A more professional lift device could have been better, but for ca zero outlay, this does the job. The stability of the floor beneath my stereo rack is now quite equal to a concrete floor. No more cartridge mistracking.
Rugs - spot damping - agree. Find a good compromise. I damped a large part of my plaster and wood ceiling in the living / listening room, due to some flutter echo and plaster type colorations, but I later found that it sounded too dull. One third of the roof damping, between the front speakers and listener position, sounds good however, it takes away the ceiling distortion without harming the rest of the sound. The point is to balance the "lively" character in the room (esp in a wood house) with the "damping" needed. I don't use heavy damping devices, but then, I have a fairly large room.
With an extremely puristic precision instrument like the Aesthetix Io, everything "else" becomes all the more important. We are trying to focus on a moon of Jupiter, metaphorically speaking. It is like having a big telescope - like my Meade ETX125EC. Unless this is very well grounded, with a totally stable foundation, I will never get a sharp image of Jupiter, not to speak of the Io moon.
So yes, two factors, the room and the electricity, play a main role. Unless this is right, what you will get is a "blurred" or suboptimal focus, and the Io is not functioning as well as it can.
In some ways I envy those with a listening room with a concrete floor, rather than a wood floor, like I have. And concrete walls and roof can be good also. I will never forget - ca 1985 - when I setup my Bose 901 speakers with a concrete wall, rather than the wood walls I was used to, behind them. This was much better, I was amazed. On the other hand, too much concrete may not be the best thing. Wood often seems to sound nice. Only it should not vibrate. To avoid that, I have installed two struts in the cellar, close to the stereo rack in the living room above. I used some thick planks, with some damping at the base and towards the plaster ceiling in the cellar, and a bit of brutal hammering to get the planks to take the load. You never know what works. A more professional lift device could have been better, but for ca zero outlay, this does the job. The stability of the floor beneath my stereo rack is now quite equal to a concrete floor. No more cartridge mistracking.
Rugs - spot damping - agree. Find a good compromise. I damped a large part of my plaster and wood ceiling in the living / listening room, due to some flutter echo and plaster type colorations, but I later found that it sounded too dull. One third of the roof damping, between the front speakers and listener position, sounds good however, it takes away the ceiling distortion without harming the rest of the sound. The point is to balance the "lively" character in the room (esp in a wood house) with the "damping" needed. I don't use heavy damping devices, but then, I have a fairly large room.
Last edited:
“Wood often seems to sound nice. Only it should not vibrate. To avoid that, I have installed two struts in the cellar, close to the stereo rack in the living room above. I used some thick planks, with some damping at the base and towards the plaster ceiling in the cellar, and a bit of brutal hammering to get the planks to take the load. You never know what works. A more professional lift device could have been better, but for ca zero outlay, this does the job. The stability of the floor beneath my stereo rack is now quite equal to a concrete floor. No more cartridge mistracking.”
This is so true. I love the tone of wood blended with all of the other ingredients. Taking the approach you did to make the floor more stable is something I would do as well. In Germany, I had concrete floors and ceiling in the listening room, which made it hard to hang lights. It was perhaps too much. Nice job, I am sure you are happy with the results of the floor stabilization project as you did not have to do major renovations to your classic European built home.
This is so true. I love the tone of wood blended with all of the other ingredients. Taking the approach you did to make the floor more stable is something I would do as well. In Germany, I had concrete floors and ceiling in the listening room, which made it hard to hang lights. It was perhaps too much. Nice job, I am sure you are happy with the results of the floor stabilization project as you did not have to do major renovations to your classic European built home.
Damping wooden floors - yes, investing in better solutions "upstream" can work better than "downstream fixes". E g damping the floor vibrations in the first place, with less need for HRS or some other sophisticated feet later (not saying that these won't make a difference). Same with electricity, starting with dedicated lines.
Aux vs second phono input: if you have a separate preamp, a second phono might be the best idea - I agree. I am only saying, the Aux input on the Io performs very well, in my experience (when using the Io with volume as stand-alone preamp).
Tube situation: have anyone managed to get ultra low noise NOS tubes for the first gain stage, in the last years? Or are these now basically sold out?
Aux vs second phono input: if you have a separate preamp, a second phono might be the best idea - I agree. I am only saying, the Aux input on the Io performs very well, in my experience (when using the Io with volume as stand-alone preamp).
Tube situation: have anyone managed to get ultra low noise NOS tubes for the first gain stage, in the last years? Or are these now basically sold out?
Last edited:
I note that Albert Porter mentioned Rca 5751 tubes as a potential candidate in the first gain stage, back in ca 2005. Have anyone tried them? Maybe they would give up some of the sonic benefit of the Io, with ca 70 percent of the gain of standard 12ax7. Maybe not.
OGH - you can still get good NOS tubes. You can search for various vendors. They tend to come and go in availability - depending on who has unearthed a stash most recently. Unless they are Mullard 10M or screened and labeled medical Telefunkens, then the seller has to be able to screen for noise/microphonics. Fortunately, I collected a lot of good tubes about 25 years ago.
It would be interesting to test the 5751 in the context of Io with volume plus preamp with volume. Who knows, if a bit less gain would turn into poorer sound, or not. I run the Io at about 70 percent on the volume and the preamp volume about 40 percent, so maybe I could just turn up the Io volume (but then, maybe, get more noise). However, these tubes are no longer low priced.
I will soon try a quad of Philips Herleen Ecc83 1972 in the first gain stage. Looking forward to it. The seller has a return policy.
If I like them, they will replace the new tubes I have used over the last weeks, first, JJ ECC83s, and next Sovtek 12ax7LPS. Both of these quads - part of selected stock tubes, from Aesthetix - are much more silent (less background tube noise) than the NOS tubes I have. I find them quite good. Switching to good new production is no catastrophy in terms of sound.
These quads of new tubes replaced my favourite quad, Telefunken ECC83, bought from Brent Jessee, in 2013. Since then, however, I used the Io quite hard, for a long time. Mostly on, in the day, and only turning it off in the evening. So they were on maybe 7000 hours over eight years. In that perspective, it is no wonder that the noise level in the first gain stage Telefunken tubes increased, in this period. Already, when I got them in 2013, they were somewhat more noisy than the best new production I had, selected by Aesthetix, but not so much. Roughly the noise level increased 50 percent over the next years, and then even more, to 60 or 70, in the last couple of years.
The Telefunkens are maybe now a little bit "tired" and "soft" or even "boring" also - said to be typical signs of old signal tubes - but not notably so. They still create a better musical illusion, in my system, than the more flat- and hard-sounding new JJ or Sovtek tubes. So it is only their louder noise that has made me replace them with new tubes, not reduction of their superior musical capability. The new tubes are great if what I wanted was a transistor-like sound. But it wasn't my wish, and not - I guess - the thinking behind the Io. Maybe, the Sovtek LPS quad sounds a tad better than the JJ - not sure.
Note that, even if the JJ and LPS are somewhat hard and flat, compared to Telefunken, the sound is still often much better than the best from my digital source (Teac NT-505 playing Tidal masters).
Anyway, it will be interesting to try Philips 1972 NOS.
If I like them, they will replace the new tubes I have used over the last weeks, first, JJ ECC83s, and next Sovtek 12ax7LPS. Both of these quads - part of selected stock tubes, from Aesthetix - are much more silent (less background tube noise) than the NOS tubes I have. I find them quite good. Switching to good new production is no catastrophy in terms of sound.
These quads of new tubes replaced my favourite quad, Telefunken ECC83, bought from Brent Jessee, in 2013. Since then, however, I used the Io quite hard, for a long time. Mostly on, in the day, and only turning it off in the evening. So they were on maybe 7000 hours over eight years. In that perspective, it is no wonder that the noise level in the first gain stage Telefunken tubes increased, in this period. Already, when I got them in 2013, they were somewhat more noisy than the best new production I had, selected by Aesthetix, but not so much. Roughly the noise level increased 50 percent over the next years, and then even more, to 60 or 70, in the last couple of years.
The Telefunkens are maybe now a little bit "tired" and "soft" or even "boring" also - said to be typical signs of old signal tubes - but not notably so. They still create a better musical illusion, in my system, than the more flat- and hard-sounding new JJ or Sovtek tubes. So it is only their louder noise that has made me replace them with new tubes, not reduction of their superior musical capability. The new tubes are great if what I wanted was a transistor-like sound. But it wasn't my wish, and not - I guess - the thinking behind the Io. Maybe, the Sovtek LPS quad sounds a tad better than the JJ - not sure.
Note that, even if the JJ and LPS are somewhat hard and flat, compared to Telefunken, the sound is still often much better than the best from my digital source (Teac NT-505 playing Tidal masters).
Anyway, it will be interesting to try Philips 1972 NOS.
Last edited:
The Philips / Herleen 1972 quad for Io first gain stage has arrived - wow, this is interesting. With the help of my wife the Io is dragged out from the rack, resting on a small table in front, minus cover, so it is easy to change between my 3-4 quads for the first stage, two NOS: Philips, Telefunken, two new: Sovtek LPS, and JJ. I am now testing these sets. I may also get a RCA Nos set up and going.
Some early impressions:
No surprise: the factory-selected new tubes (Lps, JJ83s) are the winners in terms of low noise. The Philips are somewhat more noisy, but not as much as my long-used set (Telefunken). I don't think it is a problem with my 0.56 Atlas, if the noise level stays there.
The Philips appear genuine, and unplayed (NOS/NIB) both from visual inspection and how they sound. They started sounding a bit harsh and grainy, but this has improved, over some hours. They sound (and measure) strong, and a bit "in your face", compared to the Telefunken. I check off several items on my list - large soundscape, yes. Good texture - yes, harmonic - yes, bass - maybe, coming along. Depth - improving? Less grainy over time? Maybe. We'll see.
Some early impressions:
No surprise: the factory-selected new tubes (Lps, JJ83s) are the winners in terms of low noise. The Philips are somewhat more noisy, but not as much as my long-used set (Telefunken). I don't think it is a problem with my 0.56 Atlas, if the noise level stays there.
The Philips appear genuine, and unplayed (NOS/NIB) both from visual inspection and how they sound. They started sounding a bit harsh and grainy, but this has improved, over some hours. They sound (and measure) strong, and a bit "in your face", compared to the Telefunken. I check off several items on my list - large soundscape, yes. Good texture - yes, harmonic - yes, bass - maybe, coming along. Depth - improving? Less grainy over time? Maybe. We'll see.
Similar threads
- Sticky
