Ugraditus is calling....again. Phono stage?


There is likely nothing wrong at all with present phono stage but you know how it is.

Present analog front end consists of.

Nottingham Analog Spacedeck with Spacearm.
Shelter 501 mk3 cartridge with maybe 250 hours on it, regularly treated with Lyra.
Dynavector P75 mk3 phono stage.
Feeds into Lyngdorf 2170 via Nordost Red Dawn RCA cables.

My thoughts were that possibly the Dynavector is the weakest link and would pay most dividend on an upgrade but.....

What do I perceive I am lacking right now?
Really hard to say as this is highest quality analog front end ever owned.
Possibly lacking a little in sheer scale and dynamics? Bass is very very good, instruments are well separated and defined.
Just as an overall presentation I feel it lacks that final wow factor as a whole.
Not sure if that makes any sense?
Please comment honestly especially if you feel it is another area that may reap larger benefits. Or if should just leave well alone....lol.

Oh btw I am fairly sure it is setup correctly in regards to vta etc, at least to the best of my abilities right now. And yes setting it up correctly from initial purchase did make considerable gains in sq.
128x128uberwaltz
@uberwaltz

Have you tried using the digital out on your CD player? I think you’d be pleasantly surprised with the SQ improvement through the Lyngdorf’s digital inputs.
I did but only once with the older Hegel amp and preferred the xlr input sq.
However I should really try it again in the Lyngdorf.
John (Jmcgrogan2), thanks very much for the nice words.

Regarding the Gold Note PH-10, as you mentioned it isn’t clear if the specified output impedance pertains to the balanced outputs or the unbalanced outputs or both. In addition, the website description and the brochure it links to state that the output impedance is 50 ohms, while the manual says 500 ohms. The manual also indicates that an optional tube-based output stage is available, as well as an optional external tube-based output stage. Perhaps the 500 ohm figure pertains to those options.

But even if the output impedance of the solid state output stage that is apparently standard is 500 ohms, chances are it does not have the substantial rise in output impedance (to perhaps several thousand ohms) that would result in the deep bass region from the coupling capacitor that is often used with tube-based output stages. Given that, the specified nominal impedance probably isn’t greatly different than the maximum output impedance within the audible frequency range, and therefore I suspect that a 10x ratio applied to that figure would provide results that are reasonably good if perhaps a bit marginal. Also, given the ambiguity in the specifications it seems quite possible that the balanced output impedance may be 1K, resulting in the same 10x ratio when connected to the 10K input impedance of the 2170’s balanced inputs. And of course Robelvick reported fine results with that configuration, although we don’t know for sure if the nominal output impedance involved is 50 ohms, 100 ohms, 500 ohms, or 1000 ohms.

The bottom line, IMO: The PH-10 in its standard configuration (i.e., without either of the tube-based output stage options) would most likely be a reasonable choice in terms of impedance compatibility, whether connected balanced or unbalanced.

Best regards,
-- Al

As always Al your contributions are helpful in my quest to say the least.
Many thanks as always