SUT - electrical theory and practical experience

@rauliruegas I attacked your post and not you. There is a difference.

Your post contains false information. For example you claim to have presented ’proof’ on multiple occasions. At best you presented ’evidence’ which can be used to point at a proof but even so your evidence is sketchy.

Your comment about tubes is not reflected by people that spend plenty of time listening to real music in real music venues. It was an entirely made up story based on your own personal anecdote as best I can make out.

Your use of the word ’mediocrity’ has some kind of personal meaning attached to it. I can use the word in a similar fashion; for example I don’t care at all a phono stage is super quiet if the sound coming from it is irritating- it is mediocre regardless. Generalizations frequently result in false statements.

This comment is an attack on the integrity of another member and is thus ad hominem:

I never think to use the information you share about the RIAA deviation of your unit that as I said on the subject goes around mediocrity with that 0.66 db " fligth " in the RIAA that’s good for you because is your design but that’s a shame for a RIAA phono stage.

Being ad hominem it is a logical fallacy so false by definition.

Raul, I see now that it was you who posted the rise time data, which are based on your memory of something published by an electret cartridge maker who, from your memory, is said to have stated that his cartridge has a rise time of 2 microseconds, compared to 25 microseconds for an MM and 30 microseconds for an MC plus SUT.  Holmz may have the test LP and a 'scope, but so far I don't see where he posted data.  SOOOOO, why don't you post a reference to the source of the above data?  If you can find it.  Sure, there can be many reasons why the data are not a reflection of the rise time of an MC cartridge taken by itself, and I am also sure that every MC cartridge is different in that regard.  Finally, if we are only going on the basis of subjective impressions, I would say that as a whole (meaning all MI cartridges I have heard compared to all LOMC cartridges I have heard), MI cartridges sound "fastest", to me. I have no idea if actual measurements would substantiate my opinion.

I don't know any individual that is a Tube Lover.

I do know individuals who have come to the conclusion that a HiFi System with devices built with Tube Circuits have found a device that is deeply satisfying and is a preferred experience over other experiences.

This can be discovered through the use of an individual device such as a  Phonostage, DAC,  Pre-Amp', Power Amp'. It is also available through a combination of Valve devices used. In many cases the combination is produced as Hybrid, being SS and Valve Devices to produce the System.

Those who take seriously finding a presentation from a system, to be one that is totally satisfying and able to deliver to their unique preferences are willing to take steps to increase experiences of differing permutations of available equipment.

Very few do any Math whilst on this journey, they are use their senses and stimulation created to settle the outcome of a assessment.

I am fortunate to have still have an interest in Live Music and on many occasions, can be at a close proximity to a performance, never ever have I used this type of  encounter to make a decision on a Tube vs SS Circuitry as being the superior, even if a see a Valve Amp in use, along with SS Instrumental Equipment. Never ever have I heard this as requirement to make such a assessment.

I was out of this thread, but such a huge BS Statement is not of any value in this thread. 

If one wants to talk about a Bass Notes Impact at a Live Performance being quite different from a Bass Note Impact produced by a Home System, then there is plenty to 'chew the cud' about.

Dear @lewm  : That manufacturer said that a LOMC ( with out SUT ) has a rise time between 15 to 21 microseconds and MM between 23-31 msg. ( all those depending of total capacitance electrical network. )

But his measured the MC through a SUT was 30 micro seconds.

Note those differences in between the LOMC and the LOMC+SUT+IC cables.

and subjectivity always told me that MC are faster but JC posted in that way in the long MM thread and faster than MI too.

I think that Holmz today measures could have certainty and under the control you ask for because we will know with wich cartridges in use and which SS active high gain phono stage and the SUT used.

R.

"That manufacturer said that a LOMC ( with out SUT ) has a rise time between 15 to 21 microseconds and MM between 23-31 msg."

To the best of my knowledge you never previously mentioned the data for an LOMC without SUT. Anyway, I doubt any of us can hear the difference between 21 usec (high value for MC alone) and 23 usec (low value for MM).  And still one would like to know how the measurements were made, but your new information does suggest that the SUT slowed down the LOMC, without allowing for explanations based on load, reactive components, etc., because we lack the information.