This is interesting, Gary. Is your design philosophy that the flexibility of as few as three or four loading options and two gain options is outweighed by the signal path adulteration occasioned by this flexibility?
I had a friend persuade me to put a switch to allow for 2 inputs. Try as I might, I could not find a switch transparent enough at the 0.4mV level to switch inputs.
The Aesthetix Io has DIP switch loading, and offers variable gain as an option. I have never loved DIP switches on high-end equipment. I may be wrong but they never struck me as a high-quality, high-end solution.
The Aesthetix attenuators, on the other hand, are very high-quality, discrete resistor, rotary controls.
Considering DIP switches, it depends on how much you want to pay. We can get excellent quality ones, with performance on par with rotary controls. They can be surely be an high-end solution, except for looks ... But I agree that the best switch is no switch.
Considering DIP switches, it depends on how much you want to pay. We can get excellent quality ones, with performance on par with rotary controls. They can be surely be an high-end solution, except for looks ... But I agree that the best switch is no switch.
That´s the point!. To consumers DIPs all look the same. But there are DIPs for very demanding applications like aviation, measurement, control technology and military applications. Highest demands on mechanics and contact safety.
Unfortunately, with the minimum signal path, I don't have adjustable gain. I also could not figure out the math to get accurate RIAA de-emphasis at two vastly different gain structures so an MM and a MC unit would have to be different.
I did make one single unit for a customer who wanted one for MM and one for MC, but I didn't think that anyone else would want to pay $12,000 dedicated phonostage for MM.
That´s the point!. To consumers DIPs all look the same. But there are DIPs for very demanding applications like aviation, measurement, control technology and military applications. Highest demands on mechanics and contact safety.
The Aesthetix Io has DIP switch loading, and offers variable gain as an option. I have never loved DIP switches on high-end equipment. I may be wrong but they never struck me as a high-quality, high-end solution.
The Aesthetix attenuators, on the other hand, are very high-quality, discrete resistor, rotary controls.
My latest Io Eclipse configuration uses gold plated shunt jumpers not DIP switches for loading - they are now located in the unit - They used to be on the outside back panel-not convenient but I understand why they did it that way to keep it as close as possible to the input source jack.
Proper loading is a requirement. Gain structure is also important (ie how much at the phono, preamp and amp...). How one acheives this (switches, choices, soldiering iron etc.) varies but ignoring will likely yield inferior results.
My phono stage only has 2 switches. One for input and one for Stereo/true mono. On e input has a FET step up and the other is without a step-up. I don't change cartridge models very often and when I do I will get a matching step-up for that cartridge.
Okay, thanks. I'd probably call that a clean or straightforward user interface.
Nowadays the trend in high-end phonostages (and preamps) seems more towards offering many bells and whistles, 'feature-loaded'. Sometimes these are accomplished via software and screens, sometimes packed with knobs and dials.
One thing I like about the Emia phono is you can spec input impedence of the MM (other than 47k) to match the chosen step up ratio which will then acheive a certain reflected load. Cool
Of course this can be done within reason on most preamps with a little diy
My latest Io Eclipse configuration uses gold plated shunt jumpers not DIP switches for loading - they are now located in the unit - They used to be on the outside back panel-not convenient but I understand why they did it that way to keep it as close as possible to the input source jack.
My latest Io Eclipse configuration uses gold plated shunt jumpers not DIP switches for loading - they are now located in the unit - They used to be on the outside back panel-not convenient but I understand why they did it that way to keep it as close as possible to the input source jack.
I think i have the latest design, put together by Jim White himself a couple of weeks ago. Loading can
be done internally and externally with
jumpers. Personally i question the
design for switching between inputs,
a long run of cable back and forth
to a front panel switch.
I would have placed the switches on the back panel, but i’m sure it is of little consequence sound wise.
I think i have the latest design, put together by Jim White himself a couple of weeks ago. Loading can
be done internally and externally with
jumpers. Personally i question the
design for switching between inputs,
a long run of cable back and forth
to a front panel switch.
I would have placed the switches on the back panel, but i’m sure it is of little consequence sound wise.
I have that exact configuration with the internal board . Mine was upgraded about a year ago. The way to do the switching would have been with relays at the back... but hey the physical design is maybe 20 years old now.
