Anyone seriously audition a phono stage with selectable EQ Curves and decide against it? Anyone not using this feature in theirs?

[caesar]

Anyone seriously audition a phono stage with various eq options and decide against it?

Personally, whether it’s Zanden, audio research, or Ch precision, I always find that getting the right eq is not just a tone control, as some vinyl experts claim, but a giant level of improvement in musical energy, aliveness, and more lifelike realism.

in comparison, not taking advantage of the various EQ curve settings, the system sounds like hifi to me. just blah. once experience this, can’t go back.

Curious of other members experience with these eq curve feature and level of curiosity

 

[Johan K]

Anyone seriously audition a phono stage with various eq options and decide against it?

Personally, whether it’s Zanden, audio research, or Ch precision, I always find that getting the right eq is not just a tone control, as some vinyl experts claim, but a giant level of improvement in musical energy, aliveness, and more lifelike realism.

in comparison, not taking advantage of the various EQ curve settings, the system sounds like hifi to me. just blah. once experience this, can’t go back.

Curious of other members experience with these eq curve feature and level of curiosity

Hi Caesar,

I use my five eq-curves frequently on my D’Agostino Momentum phonostage. Let’s say I put on a record that sounds dull or maybe to sharp in the upper end, I just change the eq-setting from the normal riaa, to another one that for the moment sounds better.
Very easy, and very convenient.

Why be against something that improves the moment of a good listening session?
Me myself - I have always liked tone controls and other stuff that actually enhance the sound rather then listen to a boring sound, just because ” -it is not really audiophilic correct” acording to some people (that think they know everything) to adjust the tones in the room by tone controls or different eq-settings.

When I play music in my room - it has to be fun - it has to be a ”live” feeling to it… Otherwise… how fun is it to listen to music that measure good, with zero distorsion, that sounds like crap?
No like I said - it has to be a joy to play and listen to music… and if the tone controls or the eq-curves are there you might as well use them when the need calls for it? ! That is my take on this subject.

Hope that helps.

All the best

/ Jk

 

[bonzo75]

What type of LPs are you guys using your non RIAA curves on

 

[marty]

As I stated unequivocally in my review of the Zanden 1200 MkIV, the EQ curves are indeed tone controls. However the 4th time constant correction is much more than that. It is a control that allows for the proper rendering of "time" and spatial parameters that can have significant effects on what you perceive. The question is, does it matter to you, the listener?

Once you hear what these adjustment can provide, you're either a believer or you're not. I recently spent a day with Eric Pheils of Zanden listening blinded to several LPs and settings in my system, and it was quite conclusive that we each independently validated the merits of Mr. Yamada's settings well over 90% of the time. The fact that Mikey Fremer, for whom I have considerable respect, dismissed these settings as something he did not think had value was disappointing since he admitted he has never heard the time constant corrections offered the latest Zanden phono stages. (In 1492, would he have said it doesn't pay to set sail to find the New World because everyone knows the world is flat so any ship would just sail off the edge?) He seems to prefer relying on hearsay that Zanden's approach cannot have merit by citing decades old mathematical arguments to prove his point rather than do the actual listening experiment. No matter, I'm a believer and he is not. Fine. What is known is that certain labels may have used different cutting heads (i,e, Westrex, Oroton, SX-74, DMM, others) on the same lathe (Neumann, others?) which varied considerably depending on global geography. What Mr. Yamada has done is to try and account for some of these discrepancies and variations by providing playback guidance with different circuit corrections that he felt would benefit the listener if they so desired to use them. It is to Mr. Yamada's credit he has taken on this yeoman task for the benefit of vinyl listeners, if they wish.

As everyone knows, the RIAA curve was introduced in 1954 but was not widely accepted by the record labels well into the late 60's and even later. If you have the opportunity to listen to some of the great Decca and London recordings (just to name two) before their adoption of the RIAA curve, while using Mr. Yamada's recommended EQ/phase/and t/c settings you won't listen any other way.

As Robert Hunter famously said in the legendary Grateful Dead song "Box of Rain"
"Believe it if you need it
Or leave it if you dare".

 

[Johan K]

What type of LPs are you guys using your non RIAA curves on

Hi Ked

Well actually I use the riaa curve on 95-98% of my collection, but then I have some few pressings that doesn’t t sound as good as I would like with the riaa curve, so then I just use another one that sounds better for that particular pressing. One for example is the reissue of Jean-Michael Jarre’s Oxygene, which sounds very dull and not that ”clean” if you like. So on that record I use to swich to DGG - Deutsche Grammophon, which clear things up quite a bit and get the sound into amazing.
Actually I mailed with Dan D’Agostino himself on this matter, because it didn’t feel right to me at first, and he simply told me that it was one of the reason he put the diffrent eq-curves there… to be able to change the sound for the better if needed to. The other reason was ofcourse the diffrent curves done by different record lables back in the days.
So now I don’t hasitate to try and change and listen to what sounds best - (if a record is sounding a little bit off).
Most of the time riaa still is the one to use, just to be clear of that.

Hope that helped.

Sincerely

/ Jk

 

[beaur]

Anyone seriously audition a phono stage with various eq options and decide against it?

Personally, whether it’s Zanden, audio research, or Ch precision, I always find that getting the right eq is not just a tone control, as some vinyl experts claim, but a giant level of improvement in musical energy, aliveness, and more lifelike realism.

in comparison, not taking advantage of the various EQ curve settings, the system sounds like hifi to me. just blah. once experience this, can’t go back.

Curious of other members experience with these eq curve feature and level of curiosity

I currently don’t have a variable EQ option in my system at the moment. I find that I don’t miss it as much as I thought I would. Having said that I plan on reacquiring one soon.

They are tone controls, just applied earlier to a more sensitive signal that may account for the difference you hear. I prefer units like the Thoress that allow different adjustments not fixed curves.

Beau

 

[mtemur]

What is known is that certain labels may have used different cutting heads (i,e, Westrex, Oroton, SX-74, DMM, others) on the same lathe (Neumann, others?) which varied considerably depending on global geography. What Mr. Yamada has done is to try and account for some of these discrepancies and variations by providing playback guidance with different circuit corrections that he felt would benefit the listener if they so desired to use them.

Unfortunately that is misinformation. Using different cutter heads with different lathes is not a common thing as you've said. Let me explain:

- First of all cutter head has nothing to do with RIAA equalization or reverse RIAA to be contextually correct. Cutter heads certainly have a sound signature but also all the other equipment, even cables. Mastering engineer compensates for all the equipment he/she uses and settle on his/her own flat setting. So it’s a different subject and it’s not related with cutter heads but with mastering facilities or mastering engineers.

- Neumann lathes use Neumann cutter heads, Scully lathes use Westrex or Ortofon cutter heads, Lyrec lathes use Ortofon cutter heads. You can not swap cutter heads cause suspension units are different. They’re not interchangeable that’s why it’s very rare and not common as you’ve said. Neumann cutter heads are superior to Westrex and Ortofon so it’s not logical to use Westrex on a Neumann lathe. I only know who Bernie Grundman has two Scully lathes with Neumann SX-74 cutter heads and suspension units. They’re highly modified and have Technics SP-10 MK III turntables driving the platters.

- Mono era is even more complicated and more incompatible in terms of cutter heads with advanced ball against suspension unit.

- DMM technology is limited to Neumannn VMS 82 lathe and SX-84 cutter head. DMM has different electronics but again it has those differences to comply with regular RIAA. In other words to be the same as a regular Neumann lathe but with one-step-plating process advantage. SX-84 is not directly interchangeable with SX-74. When it’s done with the help of modifications, it becomes VMS-80, a regular Neumann lathe.

Differences depending on “global geography” is not because of differences in RIAA “circuit corrections” but tone control choices of mastering engineers which shouldn’t be compensated with non-standard RIAA curves.

 

[marty]

Unfortunately that is misinformation. Using different cutter heads with different lathes is not a common thing as you said. Let me explain:

- First of all cutter head has nothing to do with RIAA equalization or reverse RIAA to be contextually correct. Cutter heads certainly have a sound signature but also all the other equipment, even cables. Mastering engineer compensates for all the equipment he/she uses and settle on his/her own flat setting. So it’s a different subject and it’s not related with cutter heads but with mastering facilities or mastering engineers.

- Neumann lathes use Neumann cutter heads, Scully lathes use Westrex or Ortofon cutter heads, Ortofon lathes use Ortofon cutter heads. You can not swap cutter heads cause suspension units are different on those lathes. They’re not interchangeable that’s why it’s very rare and not common as you’ve said. Neumann cutter heads are superior to Westrex and Ortofon so it’s not logical to use Westrex on a Neumann lathe. I only know Bernie Grundman has two Scully lathes with Neumann SX-74 cutter heads and suspension units. They’re highly modified and have Technics SP-10 MK III turntables are driving the platters.

- Mono era is even more complicated and more incompatible in trrms of cutter heads with advanced balls against suspension units.

- DMM technology is limited to Neumannn VMS 82 lathe and SX-84 cutter head. DMM has different electronics but again it has those differences to comply with regular RIAA. To be the same as a regular Neumann lathe but with one step plating process advantage. SX-84 is not directly interchangeable with SX-74. When it’s done with modifications it becomes VMS-80, a regular Neumann lathe.

Differences depending on “global geography” is not because of differences in RIAA “circuit corrections” but tone control choices of mastering engineers which shouldn’t be compensated with non-standard RIAA curves.

No argument. You're obviously far more knowledgable than me on this subject. The only question is do you think there is merit to what Yamada-san at Zanden is offering? From what I hear, the answer is quite clearly affirmative on the majority of LPs I have played. One question, if I may. Have you listened to his latest circuity in order to render an informed decision on its potential sonic benefits?

 

[mtemur]

No argument. You're obviously far more knowledgable than me on this subject. The only question is do you think there is merit to what Yamada-san at Zanden is offering? From what I hear, the answer is quite clearly affirmative on the majority of LPs I have played. One question, if I may. Have you listened to his latest circuity in order to render an informed decision on its potential sonic benefits?

I'm in no position to judge Yamada-san's engineering wisdom nor his design choices. Obviously he wanted to build a more flexible unit with various choices for user. Regardless of the argument of necessity for additional RIAA curves, it is more important to like overall sound of the unit, Zanden phono in this case. IMHO the most important outcome of this thread is not to forget switching to regular RIAA when testing new equipment. If a record that normally prefers an alternative RIAA curve starts to sound better with regular RIAA when a new cable, tube etc installed then perhaps it's better to use that tube, cable etc.

Unfortunately I haven't listened the latest unit with additional RIAA curves. I listened the one prior to that and it sounded good to my ears not the best.

 

[caesar]

Gentlemen, appreciate the replies! outsider perspective: kind of astounding that so many hard core vinyl guys go bananas over different table designs and cartridges … These are just different flavors of the same to me …. but have the audio science forum attitude regarding these phono stage innovations - that are huge leaps in realism… very strange

 

[Johan K]

Gentlemen, appreciate the replies! outsider perspective: kind of astounding that so many hard core vinyl guys go bananas over different table designs and cartridges … These are just different flavors of the same to me …. but have the audio science forum attitude regarding these phono stage innovations - that are huge leaps in realism… very strange

”kind of astounding that so many hard core vinyl guys go bananas over different table designs and cartridges … These are just different flavors of the same to me”

To me too !!
- and I like them all - but in different ways… To me it’s often the daily mode that decide.

/ Jk

 

[shakti]

I am never using the the alternate EQ curves, as I have nearly no records demanding this correction.

(listening to Zanden 1200, Thoeress Phono Enhancer, Soulnote E-2, Phasemation EA-2000 as example)

So I would not miss this feature on any future phono stage.

 

[bonzo75]

I am never using the the alternate EQ curves, as I have nearly no records demanding this correction.

this is the key. I have no idea why people who do not have old LPs or monos even need this. Anything else is EQ. If Johan is using it for 95 to 98 percent of modern records it is just EQing bass and treble and not playing as per original curve

I have compared RIAA EQ myself on Allnic, Thoress, FM 123, an external inexpensive one called esoteric phono (nothing to with the usual Esoteric company), a boutique Italian one, the phasemation EA 500 which like the Italian one had curves for decca and Columbia, and Zanden 1200. This is all with original stereos and monos.
They all make a difference to sonics, often positive, whether it is actual curve they are adjusting to or EQ as Fremer says, that I cannot say.

at the end of the day, I generally prefer thrax and Allnic phonos of which Thrax does not have EQ. Also the person I know with tens of thousands of old records including monos does not use these curves, and certainly the top 5 systems I heard did not have these curves (not saying they sounded good because of lack of curves). So I do not see a data point I would argue vehemently on, I will pick the best phono you like. If you do have old originals, by all means try the non-RIAAs to check if your RIAA only phono sounds better or worse…but your decision will not be just based on the curves alone.

 

[Johan K]

this is the key. I have no idea why people who do not have old LPs or monos even need this. Anything else is EQ. If Johan is using it for 95 to 98 percent of modern records it is just EQing bass and treble and not playing as per original curve

I have compared RIAA EQ myself on Allnic, Thoress, FM 123, an external inexpensive one called esoteric phono (nothing to with the usual Esoteric company), a boutique Italian one, the phasemation EA 500 which like the Italian one had curves for decca and Columbia, and Zanden 1200. This is all with original stereos and monos.
They all make a difference to sonics, often positive, whether it is actual curve they are adjusting to or EQ as Fremer says, that I cannot say.

at the end of the day, I generally prefer thrax and Allnic phonos of which Thrax does not have EQ. Also the person I know with tens of thousands of old records including monos does not use these curves, and certainly the top 5 systems I heard did not have these curves (not saying they sounded good because of lack of curves). So I do not see a data point I would argue vehemently on, I will pick the best phono you like. If you do have old originals, by all means try the non-RIAAs to check if your RIAA only phono sounds better or worse…but your decision will not be just based on the curves alone.

”-If Johan is using it for 95 to 98 percent of modern records it is just EQing bass and treble and not playing as per original curve”

Yes - you are absolutly right about this, and that is why I at first didn’t like to change it, because it felt wrong do to that.
But after consulted with Dan D’Agostino about this, it felt that I could use any one of them if it improved the sound at the moment. So yes I do use them more like a tone control than a different correction curve. Nevertheless, when do I use them it actually enhance and improves the sound here on those particular recordings. Right or wrong ..? Well I let that be for the ears of the beholder. I like it.. otherwise I wouldn’t use it.
But as I said before - I use the riaa curve for most of the part.

/ Jk

 

[bonzo75]

So yes I do use them more like a tone control than a different correction curve. Nevertheless, when do I use them it actually enhance and improves the sound here on those particular recordings. Right or wrong ..? Well I let that be for the ears of the beholder

Completely agree.

 

[Johan K]

One more thing I forgot to mention…
By having three different cartridges on my TT helps me futher to kind of ”EQ” the sound on different records. The carts all have a slightly different sonics, bass, mids and treble. So choose the ”right” cart that goes the best with the specific record I play is just another trick if you will, to get the most out of the grooves.

But I tell you all - It is so much fun, that 10-12 hours in the hifi bunker seems like a blink of an eye… haha.

/ Jk

 

[caesar]

I am never using the the alternate EQ curves, as I have nearly no records demanding this correction.

(listening to Zanden 1200, Thoeress Phono Enhancer, Soulnote E-2, Phasemation EA-2000 as example)

So I would not miss this feature on any future phono stage.

Hi Shakti,

Do you have older and original pressings? Or do you mostly listen to newer remasters from mobile fidelity and acoustic sounds analogue productions? If it's the latter, I understand your response. But for guys who own the older records and get at the proper setting, it KILLS the newer stuff from mobile fidelity and analogue productions. D'on't know what michael fremer has been smoking or eating, but he is way off. YMMV

 

[caesar]

My understanding is that Zanden provides a list to map the original record to the proper setting

 

[shakti]

Do you have older and original pressings?

I do own older an original pressings, but due to personal age I startet to buy my first records later in the 70's.

So far no problem with RIAA for the last 50 years with the records I bought.

I almost do not own historical pressings prior to my birth.

 

[dcc]

I have three phono stages with EQ curves (Allnic H3000V, Phasemation EA-2000 and EA-350) and my collection spans from the late 50s to today with the majority being the 60s and 70s. Allnic provides with a list of recommended curves for specific labels but after several non conclusive trials, I always went back to the RIAA curve.