Best phono stage?

[Lagonda]

If you were to test the cartridge on the bench you'd find that the loading has zero effect on it at audio frequencies because its inductance is so low. Literally it can pass a 10KHz squarewave with no rounding and loading it has no effect on that.

But loading can have a tremendous effect on the input of the phono section.

As you know, the cartridge is an inductor. Its in parallel with the capacitance of the tonearm cable; together they form a tuned resonant circuit (this is the same principle used to tune the FM radio in your car). With most LOMC cartridges this resonance can be as much as 30dB above the signal of the cartridge and might be between 1MHz and 5MHz. When that peak goes into excitation (oscillation, which it does when a signal is present), if the phono section isn't able to handle the RFI it will make distortion, which you hear as brightness.

The loading resistor detunes that resonant peak; thus killing the oscillation. That gets rid of the brightness.

The theory behind inductors and capacitance in parallel is taught in electronics 101 in the first week anywhere where electronics is taught. But many designers that did not take that aspect of LP playback into account. So their phono sections respond to loading resistors- its easily heard. But if the phono section can handle the RFI thus injected into the input of the phono section then the loading resistor doesn't do anything. You get less ticks and pops too.

This is all very easy to demonstrate, easy to measure and there is a thread on this site that goes into this particular topic with quite a bit more depth.

Yes we have heard your stories before, it is a great marketing strategy. In real life i especially hear the changing of the bass response, not a brightness or oscillation when changing cartridge loading, pops and ticks are none existent when not on the record or from a tube.

 

[Atmasphere]

Yes we have heard your stories before, it is a great marketing strategy. In real life i especially hear the changing of the bass response, not a brightness or oscillation when changing cartridge loading, pops and ticks are none existent when not on the record or from a tube.

In real life its easy enough to show if you have a square wave generator and an oscilloscope. And of course a LOMC cartridge.

 

[Salectric]

In real life it’s easy enough to show if you have a square wave generator and an oscilloscope. And of course a LOMC cartridge.

So if you can’t see a difference on the scope, there’s no change in sound?

 

[jbrrp1]

I had my Basis tt, Airtangent arm, compressor pump and a few thousand lps stored away 7 years due to lack of room.
I started to stream music and was appalled by the sound quality in the beginning.
To my surprise after spending a boatload of money streaming did sound musically engaging and I was and am still happy with it.

A new home, enough room for my analog toys.

I would like to add a CH Precision 1 to my L1, X1, A1.5.
When budget allows, sigh. Right now my Klyne 7 phono stage will have to do.

Will my vintage Klyne be embarrassed by today’s phono stages? What to expect from it and new phono stages?

"Embarrassed"? Likely not, but I do think "bettered". But I owned the Klyne 7 back in the '90's, sold it off, but then tried it again with the 3.5 version in the latter '00's. When I then tried an EAR 324, I felt it bettered the Klyne, and so sold the Klyne (again) - - the EAR was more resolving and informative, with also a bit better microdynamic "jump" and resulting performance nuance, IMO. I'm pretty confident a CH Precision P1/X1 would be an upward move, too (I run the P10 presently).

 

[Rensselaer]

"Embarrassed"? Likely not, but I do think "bettered". But I owned the Klyne 7 back in the '90's, sold it off, but then tried it again with the 3.5 version in the latter '00's. When I then tried an EAR 324, I felt it bettered the Klyne, and so sold the Klyne (again) - - the EAR was more resolving and informative, with also a bit better microdynamic "jump" and resulting performance nuance, IMO. I'm pretty confident a CH Precision P1/X1 would be an upward move, too (I run the P10 presently).

I would support the use of EAR phono stages too. A couple of months back Kedar brought over a used EAR834P that he said had Telefunken ECC83’s installed in place of whatever 12AX7’s they usually come with. The EAR does MM and MC so the plan was to try it in place of my Ypsilon VPS100 phono stage, with and without my Phasemation T-2000 step up transformers.

Getting to the point; the EAR834P with Telefunken ECC83 valves, set on MM, but utilising the Phasemation SUT’s sounded better than my Ypsilon VPS100 with the Phasemation T2000 SUT’s. Negatives? The EAR is run off a wall wart, plugged in and hot all the time, it is not that big and heavy interconnects could lift an end.

The Ypsilon sells for around £17,000 whereas the EAR can be found used for less than £2000 including a set of NOS smooth plate Telefunkens from Brent Jesse (but the Phasemations cost about £8000 a pair).

 

[thekong]

I would support the use of EAR phono stages too. A couple of months back Kedar brought over a used EAR834P that he said had Telefunken ECC83’s installed in place of whatever 12AX7’s they usually come with. The EAR does MM and MC so the plan was to try it in place of my Ypsilon VPS100 phono stages too, with and without my Phasemation T-2000 step up transformers.

Getting to the point, the EAR834P with Telefunken ECC83 valves, set on MM, but utilising the Phasemation SUT’s sounded better than my Ypsilon VPS100 with the Phasemation T2000 SUT’s. Negatives? The EAR is run off a wall wart, plugged in and hot all the time, it is not that big and heavy interconnects could lift an end.

The EAR can be found used for less than £2000, including a set of NOS smooth plate Telefunkens from Brent Jesse, but the Phasemations cost about £8000 a pair (one per channel).

If you could get your hands on another EAR834P, I would suggest you try out the dual mono setup, ie. using only one channel on each unit, I think you would be surprised

 

[wbass]

If you could get your hands on another EAR834P, I would suggest you try out the dual mono setup, ie. using only one channel on each unit, I think you would be surprised

Can you explain the benefit of running it that way? Wouldn't the unused channel of each unit still be introducing crosstalk/noise? Or do you mean that it's half the pull on the tubes/transformers?

A genuine question, not a refutation, and I'm certainly not an electrical engineer, so forgive the imprecise terminology.

I just picked up an EAR834P clone with some upgrades from Mike Pickwell for a very reasonable price, and I'm curious to try it with the SUTs I have (when I finally get my system back up and running). When I was auditioning budget to midrange phono stages a few years ago, two that I really enjoyed were the EAR834P and the Nagra BPS. The EAR wasn't the quietest (nor was it particularly noisy), but it had among the best tonal balance, with a nice bit of bottom end heft but nothing too rolled up top.

In general, or in almost all of my auditions, an external SUT was a nice improvement. I think the weakness of a lot of phono stages that use internal SUTs is that those transformers can easily be bettered.

 

[andromedaaudio]

I thought the new vertere was also very good .




and this one

​

 

[Lagonda]

If you could get your hands on another EAR834P, I would suggest you try out the dual mono setup, ie. using only one channel on each unit, I think you would be surprised

How does it compare to your Io ?

 

[bonzo75]

Can you explain the benefit of running it that way? Wouldn't the unused channel of each unit still be introducing crosstalk/noise? Or do you mean that it's half the pull on the tubes/transformers?

A genuine question, not a refutation, and I'm certainly not an electrical engineer, so forgive the imprecise terminology.

I just picked up an EAR834P clone with some upgrades from Mike Pickwell for a very reasonable price, and I'm curious to try it with the SUTs I have (when I finally get my system back up and running). When I was auditioning budget to midrange phono stages a few years ago, two that I really enjoyed were the EAR834P and the Nagra BPS. The EAR wasn't the quietest (nor was it particularly noisy), but it had among the best tonal balance, with a nice bit of bottom end heft but nothing too rolled up top.

In general, or in almost all of my auditions, an external SUT was a nice improvement. I think the weakness of a lot of phono stages that use internal SUTs is that those transformers can easily be bettered.

Hi, if you are in the UK now, i would like to compare this clone. I can get a 834p over

 

[bonzo75]

How does it compare to your Io ?

It is very difficult to match the midbass weight and the large stage the IO creates, and if you roll 24 tubes carefully, you can create any magic

 

[Lagonda]

It is very difficult to match the midbass weight and the large stage the IO creates, and if you roll 24 tubes carefully, you can create any magic

Yes, i am coming to the same conclusion after rolling tubes for a couple of months and also realizing finding good sounding tubes that lasts is a whole hobby in itself. Ukrainien tube vendors must have me on their preferred suckers list by now !

 

[wbass]

Hi, if you are in the UK now, i would like to compare this clone. I can get a 834p over

Hey, Ked, won't have a system set up until September at the earliest, I'm afraid. But I've got the EAR clone and some other SUT goodies here, so could do some compares at another venue, if one comes to mind. Please PM if so. Cheers.

 

[thekong]

Can you explain the benefit of running it that way? Wouldn't the unused channel of each unit still be introducing crosstalk/noise? Or do you mean that it's half the pull on the tubes/transformers?

A genuine question, not a refutation, and I'm certainly not an electrical engineer, so forgive the imprecise terminology.

I just picked up an EAR834P clone with some upgrades from Mike Pickwell for a very reasonable price, and I'm curious to try it with the SUTs I have (when I finally get my system back up and running). When I was auditioning budget to midrange phono stages a few years ago, two that I really enjoyed were the EAR834P and the Nagra BPS. The EAR wasn't the quietest (nor was it particularly noisy), but it had among the best tonal balance, with a nice bit of bottom end heft but nothing too rolled up top.

In general, or in almost all of my auditions, an external SUT was a nice improvement. I think the weakness of a lot of phono stages that use internal SUTs is that those transformers can easily be bettered.

I am no engineer, so can’t be sure what is going on, but the finding has been confirmed by my close group of audiophile friends. The first phono that we found benefited by this dual mono setup was the Pass Xono. From then on, we found pretty much all models without dual mono power supplies from the factory benefited from this setup, including the EAR834, Pass XVR 1 electronic Xover. Actually, I just have an engineer friends custom built a dual mono power supply for my Pass X0.2 linestage.

I think the benefit is due to the beefed up power supply (whole power supply just for one channel), as well as decreased interference between the two channels! Actually, you can also find similar upgrade in factory made units, such as the Aesthetix Io, which can be upgraded from one to two power supplies. As far as I understand, the CH Precision’s flagship P10 phono also offers similar upgrades from stereo to dual mono version.

 

[thekong]

How does it compare to your Io ?

Yes, the Io’s mid bass weight and soundstage is still hard to beat To my ears, while the dual mono EAR834P sounds quite nice, it still lacks the Io’s resolution and authority. But then, I have never auditioned the 834P with Telefunken tubes, so that could make a difference, especially in terms of resolution.

 

[Rensselaer]

Yes, the Io’s mid bass weight and soundstage is still hard to beat To my ears, while the dual mono EAR834P sounds quite nice, it still lacks the Io’s resolution and authority. But then, I have never auditioned the 834P with Telefunken tubes, so that could make a difference, especially in terms of resolution.

The EAR834P on MC setting, ehh, not so great, but on MM setting through my Phasemation T-2000SUTs, then yes, sort of magical.

 

[Atmasphere]

So if you can’t see a difference on the scope, there’s no change in sound?

When we're talking about square waves, yes. even a very slight rounding of the corners is audible depending on the frequency. At 10KHz a slight rounding would not be audible as the harmonics that cause the corners of the square wave are too high to be sensed. But what the 10KHz squarewave demonstrates is that frequency response several octaves beyond human hearing is not affected by loading.

Therefore the loading is not affecting the cartridge's frequency response; something else is going on (which I explained).

 

[Kcin]

It is very difficult to match the midbass weight and the large stage the IO creates, and if you roll 24 tubes carefully, you can create any magic

This is where the Io excels- hard to beat at any price

Yes, i am coming to the same conclusion after rolling tubes for a couple of months and also realizing finding good sounding tubes that lasts is a whole hobby in itself. Ukrainien tube vendors must have me on their preferred suckers list by now !

I had a second Io here for an acquaintance, he was considering purchase, however, there was a complaint of "noise" on one channel.
In the end it was a poorly seated tube from some aggressive tube rolling & I discovered he wore an apple watch around the unit- not cool you will get "chuff" - "chuff" sounds from the cell frequencies - keep cell phones and apple watches away at least 6 feet !

The real story is that the unit was full of Chinese and Russian tubes from the seller and sounded absolutely awful. Flat no life it sounded broken.

In the process of diagnosing the problem I put in noise tested Telefunkens ECC83 and ECC88 along with an RCA red base 5692 - in a word transformational. The sound stage was expansive , detail without grain, depth to die for, tonality and appropriate bass weight ( Try Crash by Charly Antolini on Jeton- Wow!- not something to relax to- but great to judge capacity of the system) . You just can not compromise on tubes with the Io it will not pay you back with the potential. You are dealing F1 here not your local track.

I am no engineer, so can’t be sure what is going on, but the finding has been confirmed by my close group of audiophile friends. The first phono that we found benefited by this dual mono setup was the Pass Xono. From then on, we found pretty much all models without dual mono power supplies from the factory benefited from this setup, including the EAR834, Pass XVR 1 electronic Xover. Actually, I just have an engineer friends custom built a dual mono power supply for my Pass X0.2 linestage.

I think the benefit is due to the beefed up power supply (whole power supply just for one channel), as well as decreased interference between the two channels! Actually, you can also find similar upgrade in factory made units, such as the Aesthetix Io, which can be upgraded from one to two power supplies. As far as I understand, the CH Precision’s flagship P10 phono also offers similar upgrades from stereo to dual mono version.

Other observations: this unit was one power supply - there is a clear advantage to two power supplies way more solidity and separation. With the new transformers a further level of quietness and low end atriculation. If I was unsure about how to describe a 2nd power supply and the new transformers- I am certain now as I had this unit and my unit in the same system - same cartridge playing the same software.

"Embarrassed"? Likely not, but I do think "bettered". But I owned the Klyne 7 back in the '90's, sold it off, but then tried it again with the 3.5 version in the latter '00's. When I then tried an EAR 324, I felt it bettered the Klyne, and so sold the Klyne (again) - - the EAR was more resolving and informative, with also a bit better microdynamic "jump" and resulting performance nuance, IMO. I'm pretty confident a CH Precision P1/X1 would be an upward move, too (I run the P10 presently).

It's difficult to beat the Klyne for SS - I sold one and bought it back - Its the only SS unit I can live with for the price. I had a CH P1 here on numerous occasions for extensive listening and a few people in our group own them - one with absolutely dual mono setup The CH is precise clean with a user interface that is about second to none. Is it" better"than the Klyne- sure- but I could argue why the Klyne makes a lot of sense on many fronts including its presentation.

The SS vs tube debate stands here strongly as there is no question as to the provenance of each unit. If you are partisan to any one philosophy - you probably can't live with the alternative.

Yes, the Io’s mid bass weight and soundstage is still hard to beat To my ears, while the dual mono EAR834P sounds quite nice, it still lacks the Io’s resolution and authority. But then, I have never auditioned the 834P with Telefunken tubes, so that could make a difference, especially in terms of resolution.

I must admit that I have never tried dual mono EAR834P - but its stock version here was good- I will call it good for the money- but it's no Io no how- even loaded with NOS tubes out of my stock-- YMMV

 

[Argonaut]

Or MK II R ( sans pre amp )

EMT JPA 66

Jules Limon's long-standing friendly collaboration with Harry and Markus Pawel led to the development of the JPA 66, a multi-award-winning tube device that has been lovingly handcrafted in the Pawel...

emt-tontechnik.ch

 

[Muser]

KCIN wrote: It's difficult to beat the Klyne for SS - I sold one and bought it back - Its the only SS unit I can live with for the price.

KCIN :
I'm interested in hearing how you think the Klyne and 834P match and differ. I have EAR's replacement for the 834P, the Phono Classic. I believe it was a Klyne 7 I heard in the late 1990s that was the first SS phono stage I really liked.

Is your opinion based on the Klyne with MM or MC or both? Do you recall whether it was paired with an external SUT? I probably should get an external SUT for the Phono Classic, but wondering if I could happily simply jump ship for the Klyne (only I can know that) but curious what your take would be.