Thoress+SUT is definitely better than the P1 MC current mode. P1 MM+SUT is also the same, better than MC current. It is especially true with MSL 1030. Even with EAR MC4, I still prefer the SUT combo.
To SUT or not to SUT?
- Thread starter iaxel
- Start date
Thoress+SUT is definitely better than the P1 MC current mode. P1 MM+SUT is also the same, better than MC current. It is especially true with MSL 1030. Even with EAR MC4, I still prefer the SUT combo.
I don’t have a low Imp cart anymore, used to own an Ikeda KAI with 0.19mv output but had sold it before I get an SUT.
I have 2 other Carts, VDH colibri XPW and a recently bought Allnic Amber, both at about 0.35mv output. With proper amplification rate applied, I prefer SUT more than straight-into P1 or Thoress.
I’m waiting to see how Amber would cope with Allnic H-8000, also a SUT design. With Colibri, 50 ohm imp and 0.38mv output, in the phono stages I have, surprisingly I find EAR 324 in MC loaded at 15 ohm (20x) makes the best combo, with enough dynamics and bass where VDH Colibri cannot be properly amplified by many phonos and it is also deadly quiet. With the shell-less design, VDH cart is very sensitive to ground and EAR 324 does a very good job here.
VERY interesting...
I wonder if anyone's played around with the Dynavector SUP-200. It doesn't seem to come up too often. I'm auditioning one at the moment, comparing it to a Bob's Devices Sky 20. Carts are an SPU Synergy G and a Koetsu Black Goldline. I've not paid much attention, thus far, to whether either are good matches on paper to the Dyna. It's a low-stakes audition anyway, a loaner. Price-wise it sits at $2650 msrp. Thus far sounds good, but I only have a few SUTs to compare with, all more modest.
Wonder whose transformers they're using. Hashimoto? Their own?
"The SUP-200 has 26dB gain and can be matched with all moving coil cartridges within the 3-35 ohms Impedance range and an output voltage of more than 0.1mV." I believe that means it's a 1:20 step up ratio.
Wonder whose transformers they're using. Hashimoto? Their own?
"The SUP-200 has 26dB gain and can be matched with all moving coil cartridges within the 3-35 ohms Impedance range and an output voltage of more than 0.1mV." I believe that means it's a 1:20 step up ratio.
Last edited:
Dear friend: You are rigth but the question of your thread states: SUT or not SUT.
Other than the electrical match/mistmatch issues with SUTs for me the main subject is the overall quality of the carrtridge signal amplified and this depends only of the rigth and precise design of the active high gain phonolinepreamp or the SUT quality overall design.
First than all the the better and best active gain device for a MC cartridge are bipolars ones and for MM cartridges are FETs. Several active high gain phono stages use FETs for MC cartridges due that the handle and design is a lot more easy that to deal with " savage "bipolar where we need matched pairs to start with.
You own an not easy to digest electronic items combination in your system using SS/tube units. The XP25 is a good phono stage but not the best out there. Pass is way better with amplifiers that with phono stages and not today but from he was an owns Treshold and used bipolar output devices in the top of the line Stasis e pure class A amplifiers. Lovely design and quality level performance:
https://www.hi-fi.ru/upload/iblock/1a2/1a27110b8c03c44cc905cc7defc8a5af.JPG
A SUT has inherent disadvantages because normally you need additional IC cables with additional input/output connectors and solder joints where the cartridge signal must pass through and all these additional steps makes signal degradation no matters what the other disadvantage is about its frequency range limitations.
A good active high gain phono stage has none of those disadvantages and several advantages, again with the rigth design using the rigth gain devices.
My phonolinepreamp performs really good with any cartridge but I own and owned several SUTs because are " atractive " alternative, I can say a different alternative not better one. It can't be but good alternative.
I own and owned several SUTs from very humble as the Denon 340 to glamorous Kondo and the best I experienced in my system and several other systems is the Denon AU-1000 that rigth now I'm listening through:
https://www.denon.jp/ja-jp/museum/products/au1000.html
Look the frequency range: 5hz to 200khz flat. Try that the SUT you choose has this kind of frequency range response, extremely important for the quality level performance.
SUT or not SUT: you has to try. I don't like that Thoress equalizers kind of design but this is up to each owner.
Yes, my opinion is that not SUT combination can beats a good active SS high designs but the issue is exactly that: good designs and this is not easy to find out, so the SUT is good alternative and as you said some are seduced by.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS.
Please have in mind, that Thoeress does offer his PhonoPre in different gain versions, to be customized prior order.
The High Gain Version does not work properly (distortions) with 20x or 30x SUT and high output Carts (like all MSL derivatives),
the low Gain Version is very fine with all kinds of SUT combinations.
The High Gain Version does not work properly (distortions) with 20x or 30x SUT and high output Carts (like all MSL derivatives),
the low Gain Version is very fine with all kinds of SUT combinations.
Dear friend: through the next links we can read that LOMC cartridges are almost immune to load impedance changes:
http://www.mh-audio.nl/Calculators/StepUpTransformer.html
https://www.theanalogdept.com/sut.htm
http://www.rothwellaudioproducts.co.uk/html/mc_step-up_transformers_explai.html
Are you curious about? then go a head you can loose nothing and will win knowledge first hand experiences on the SUT or not SUT subject.
Today there are to many SUT options but the vintage ones are really great as that one by Denon and exist the Technics SH-305 with control options and a frequency range comind from: 3hz to 300khz +,-0.4db.
Entré are really good too.
In the past the top LOMC carteridges designs always came with the manufacturer own SUT recommendation becasuse in thise old times just does not exist good active high gain phono stage designs.
Many of those cartridge manufacturers designed its SUTs dedicated for a precise LOMC model and these are some examples ( there are many more ):
Ortofon MC-2000 cartridge along the T-2000 transformer, this great MC cartridge ( I own it. ) has 0.05mv output level.
Ortofon did it the same for the MC3000 and 5000 cartridges and
Amade it with its great MC AT 1000MC ( I owned too. One pice diamond cantilever/stylus. ) along its AT 1000T that came with four transformers where two of them where dedicated to the 1000 MC and the other pair " universal ".
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Thank you very much Raul (?), I appreciate your inputs and recommendation!
for me MC cartridge should definitely be used with a SUT and a tube phono stage.
I think quite a few tube phono stages have built in SUTs behind their 'MC' inputs. It begs the question whether this is a good thing or whether you should match the SUT to your MC cart and use a real MM input instead.
Yes to SUT!
I am using Phasemation pp2000 and a MSL sig. is on its way.
I didn’t believe in SUT until I heard a good one, now I have 15. All vintage though, hard to find newly made ones that are as capable and I have heard some of the most renown ones.
I used 1:15 for Phasemation and that works well. 4.5mv output works well in my System. Using full range no crossover. I do not ‘load’ the cartridge, leave it as 47k fr the phono. If u do the maths any impedance less than 20ohm made v little difference to the gain.
Using the right SUT gives a more open, natural sound. And more importantly the tone and timbre. Unfortunately there is no one SUT fits all. Matching the cart and SUT is critical. Try not to overground the SUT either.
That’s why SUT route is a rabbit hole, they multiply!
I am using Phasemation pp2000 and a MSL sig. is on its way.
I didn’t believe in SUT until I heard a good one, now I have 15. All vintage though, hard to find newly made ones that are as capable and I have heard some of the most renown ones.
I used 1:15 for Phasemation and that works well. 4.5mv output works well in my System. Using full range no crossover. I do not ‘load’ the cartridge, leave it as 47k fr the phono. If u do the maths any impedance less than 20ohm made v little difference to the gain.
Using the right SUT gives a more open, natural sound. And more importantly the tone and timbre. Unfortunately there is no one SUT fits all. Matching the cart and SUT is critical. Try not to overground the SUT either.
That’s why SUT route is a rabbit hole, they multiply!
a phono stage with a built in SUT surely gives convenience but I think it should be a separate SUT and a tube phono stage as you noted. I mean "MM" by tube phono stage.
With new phono stages built in mc often are Lundahl with 1:20 or 1:25 ratios. But such ratio may not suit all cartridges and limited in the tonal quality to one type of step up.To get the best out of cartridges, I believe SUT matching is v important. Let’s leave the convenience to digital playback.
Dear friends ( bazelio too ): time to learn for me. Please let me know the facts behind that statement and I mean facts not that " sounds better " or " I like it to much " and those kind of subjective opinions but facts/objective one.
Could you share those facts? thank's in advance and appreciated with.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS.
there are no proving facts and it’s not related. otherwise we were not be favouring old technologies with poor technical specifications such as tubes and vinyl records.
if you want a technical fact about SUT and tube phono stage’s superiority from me first of all you should explain me technical facts or proofs about vinyl records over digital formats.
are you aware of it’s technical limitations?
no proof needed we simply like it better. that’s all.
Dear friend: this is the first time and the last that I will give you a conditonated answer before you give an answer to the questions posted by me because it's not me whom has to prove what you posted but it's you who should/must do/prove it with out conditioning other gentlemans to give something in change. Was your statement not mine.
Anyway here I come, please read my post number 316 in this thread:
https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/the-sound-of-analog-the-sound-of-digital.31038/page-16
So for me today there is no superiority of vinyl over digital. Exist some other proofs additional to what I posted there but with that is enough.
So now I think could be time for I can learn from you. Thank's in advance.
Hey, you said " we simply like it better ". So ( example. ) the Lamm Signature with a SUT is your vinyl dream ( or something like that. ) even that the Lamm RIAA eq. deviation is as poor as a swing of 0.6dbs ! ! Obviously no proof need it, as you said. Everything is down there an speaks by it self and speaks for not so demanding audiophiles quality level targets.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS.
Last edited:
The proof the pudding is in the eating, not in assessing and measuring the ingredients.
Yes but if there is rum in that cake it will taste better than one without sugar
Similar threads
