Phono Preamps with "balls" ?


taking the cue from another thread about speakers with "balls" - what are some phono preamps that you have found to be the most powerful, dynamic and yet still sound clean.  
i turn on my digital sources and they are often much more robust sounding and would like to know if there are phono preamps that can deliver.  thanks in advance  
avanti1960
@jcarr : There is a real bipolar " problem " against FETs and is that you need perfect matched devices and other problem is to make a precise way for polarization. Designs front end with bipolars is not an easy task and needs more work than with FETS but the rewards makes worth to do it. The unit I'm using is a current fully difirential and totally dual mono design where exist in reality 3 separate circuits: one for MC ( with only two bipolars gain stages. ), one for MM ( this one use MOSFETS not bipolars ) and one line stage.

In design each designer has its own and almost " unique "  skills and as a cartridge designer you know very well that and can understand why the Colibri performs diferent from the Etna or the Ana. All are very good carrtridge designs but are each one " unique "  in its diferent quality level performance. I like all ones but the Colibri makes something than no other cartridge I experienced ( including yours. ) can't do it at the same level and is the precise and clear definition of the very high frequencies. All those 3 designs are different and VDH, you and Ortofon shares the same knowledge levels but different " skills " or the other way around ( I can't find out how to explain those differences. ).

If knowledge and skills levels in designers were evenly then almost all sill sounds the " same " and no one phonopreamp or amps or cartridge or speakers sounds the same.

In cartridges is more complex because the designer must have to do the cartridge voicing and certainly VDH, you and Ortofon uses diifferent system and techniics to do it and with different targets.

Neumann constant: for many years Ortofon used a " golden ears panel " to make several tests to improve its cartridge designs. From many many tests through that " golden ears " panel they concluded that its cartridges must have a peack over 20khz instead totally flat. It was tghrough this high frequency deviation where  that panel agree it was achieved the top quality level performance. Of course that the pannel never knew the frequency response of the different cartridge Ortofon samples they were listening.

Well , the Neumann constant/pole makes that come back the " spark " in the high frequencies that is totally losted with out it and this is what that pannel tell us in a different kind of tests.

I know that you read everything on audio an especially analog and I read too what you posted about the half-speed recording tool.The gentlemans as you that do not like to use the Neumann constant normally never listened and that's why I ask if you did it in your phonopreamp.

@atmasphere : """  I'm not interested in getting it sound like a good stereo. It has to sound like real music. """

me neither. A good SS stereo design always will performs as " real " music, it can't be in other way.

R.
@jcarr : DMM: well it uses Neumann cutter head/stylus that goes not burning due that metal does not burns as normal laquer recordings.

Bwefore I owned my today unit I never really like it the Teldec DMM recordings not even the few digital Telarc recordings and was till I listened the Scottfish recordings that I really appreciated the advantage of DMM . I have to say that I don't remember I tested those recordings with and with out the Neumann constant so I can't tell you in this precise moment but certainly I will do some time in the short future and share my experience about.

You are a LOMC designer so I don't need to enligth you why bipolars are better electrical match than FETs. This is not about wiisdom . It's about design and as you that does not disclose your Lyra new generation " unique " design keys don't ask for it. Please !

R.
@jcarr : Now I understand your questioning. That phono stage originally was designed by P-mares and a contribution from you latter on. Is not even balanced and used Jfets at the input with an AD829 overall topology  design and I was thinking was your own design an a unique one but it’s not. ! !

You never listened the Neumann constant in your unit because P.Mares never designed it that way. I ask if you did it in your unit and you gave me a wrong or false answer. ? ! ? !

Enough.  
R.
>There is a real bipolar " problem " against FETs and is that you need perfect matched devices<

As I wrote earlier, the JFET matching issue can easily be addressed by measuring and sorting. This requires extra work and organization on the part of the manufacturer, but it is completely doable, and the countermeasures will not bring any disadvantageous side-effects (unlike the base current and internal diode issues of a bipolar transistor front-end).

>the Neumann constant/pole makes that come back the " spark " in the high frequencies that is totally losted with out it and this is what that panel tell us in a different kind of tests.<

What implementing the Neumann constant will unequivocally do is force the phono EQ amplifier response to rise at HF, which will boost the high-frequency energy in the pops and clicks on your LPs, making them noisier.

The issue with DMM is a bit similar - the cutter operates with a high-frequency bias signal (of around 70kHz) to make it easier to cut the amorphous copper blank. This bias signal is sufficiently large enough that you may be able to discern it as a distinctive pattern if you look at a DMM LP with a microscope.

Implementing the Neumann constant in a phono stage again will give extra amplification to the 70kHz bias signal. This doesn't stand out as being the most optimal approach.

>You are a LOMC designer so I don't need to enligth you why bipolars are better electrical match than FETs.<

Your arguments haven't been very convincing so far.

>This is not about wiisdom.<

At least we can agree on one thing!

>That phono stage originally was designed by P-mares and a contribution from you latter on. Is not even balanced and used Jfets at the input with an AD829m overall topology and I was thinking was your own design an a unique one but it's not.<

@rauliruegas, wrong again. My present phono equalizer circuit can be loosely regarded as sharing a similar conceptual approach as the HPS 5.1, shown at the following page, but done with completely discrete devices.

http://www.synaesthesia.ca/LNschematics.html

In any case, I hope that you will become able to technically substantiate your opinions.

kind regards, jonathan