Phono Stage upgrade to complement Dohmann Helix One Mk 2


Thanks to the recommendations from many users on this Audiogon blog, I think I was able to make a more informed purchase of a turntable, the Dohmann Helix One Mk 2.  I've really been enjoying the turntable for the past month!  

The next phase of my system now needs attention:  the phono stage.  Currently, I'm using a Manley Steelhead v2 running into an Ypsilon PST-100 Mk2 SE pre-amplifier (into Ypsilon Hyperion monoblocks, into Sound Lab M745PX electrostatic speakers). 

I've been told that I could really improve my system by upgrading the phono stage from the Manley Steelhead (although I've also been told that the Manley Steelhead is one of the best phono stages ever made).  
Interestingly, two of the top phono stages that I'm considering require a step-up transformer (SUT).  I'm not fully informed about any inherent advantages or disadvantages of using an SUT versus connecting directly to the phono stage itself.  

I suppose my current top two considerations for a phono stage are the Ypsilon VPS-100 and the EM/IA  LR Phono Corrector, both of which utilize an SUT.  I don't have a particular price range, but I find it hard to spend $100k on stereo components, so I'm probably looking in the $15k - $70k price range. 
Thanks. 

drbond

Hi drbond:

I’m using the KRONOS PHONO PREAMPLIER.

I only can say that it deserves a chance.

I could use words to describe the sound and silence, but 

much better if you can test it. No come back.

Can support all LOMC.

I enjoy the electrostatic sound of SOUNDLAB U-545

and Atma-Sphere. The combo is magic when you feel all details.

Regards,

 

 

My speakers are Soundlab 545

I would suggest that going a bit slow is not a crime.,, and doing it right can be a chin-scratcher.

You can call or find dealer and look at what is on offer.
And some manufacturers answer the phone.

I could not find Velodyne, but Martin Logan has a bunch of dealers around Sarasota, and Vandersteen in Miami or Atlanta.

 

My pre-amplifier has two outputs: RCA and XLR, so I can run the RCA to the amplifier and the XLR to the subwoofer, or vice-versa, as the amplifier has both RCA and XLR inputs.

That works if the sub needs an RCA input and has its own filtering scheme.
I have not been overly shy in liking the approach of pulling the signal off of the binding posts.

 

I was leaning towards a lower crossover for the HPF, something like 80 Hz, or maybe 60-80 Hz, to keep the midrange in the ESL’s

Again I have not been shy in advocating the 1st order (6 dB/octave) at 100Hz.

  • You attach the HPF at the amp side of the cable.
  • Attach the line level cables to the speaker posts.
  • Turn some pots on the back to set the levels.

and then you’re I’m done.

I would suggest seeing what the fuss is about, and if you go with a Velodyne or ML, then you at least went in with the eyes open.
 

Holmz, the first two of your last 3 bullet points would result in bypassing the main amplifier.

Hmmm. . .I’m back to the consideration stage: apparently, the most neutral approach to add a HPF in my current system is via a high-grade capacitor. However, these capacitors only give a 6 db / octave adjustment, which means starting at 80 Hz (so that the mid-range isn’t affected), would only drop the volume by 6 db at 40 Hz, which is the lowest sound played by the cello, although the piano may drop to 30 Hz on occasion, which would give about a 9 db decrease in signal to the main ESL speakers.

To put things in perspective, one click on the volume knob on my pre-amplifier is about 2 db (and it is usually set around 26 clicks) so we’re talking dropping the volume only 3 clicks for most low frequencies, and at most 4 clicks for the lowest, which is only going to be about a 10-20% drop in volume for these frequencies.  So I’m not sure a standard analog capacitor HPF is going to make much of a difference in attenuating the signal to the main ESL’s; and apparently, the built in HPF in subwoofers are also the standard 6db / octave. Ideally, I would get a high quality analog HPF, which would minimally affect the SQ, and filter at 24 db / octave. . .but that may be like the tooth fairy: impossible!

@holmz , Not at all. You ever tried an analog crossover on ESLs? Wel I have, several ones and they all turned out to be awful in the end. You can do it but there are far superior ways.

@drbond , 6 dB/oct is no where near fast enough to get the drop in distortion and increased head room I have been talking about. My filters are currently 48 dB/oct and the only way you can do that in an invisible fashion is with digital crossovers. I have been through every permutation of this problem some several times and have lost a lot of hair over it. If you do not want to use anything digital in your system you are better off without subwoofers otherwise they will drive you nuts and you will have wasted a lot of money. Subwoofers have to disappear into the music. You should not know they are there until a very low note comes along. In order to get the benefits of lower distortion and increased headroom, critical for ESLs you have to cross over in the area of 100 Hz which makes life even more difficult. Subwoofers also have to be placed in specific locations in order to work well. They are over 6 dB more efficient against walls and even more in corners. You also eliminate some (but not all) of the room interaction this way. This places them three to 5 feet behind the ESLs. In order to get the speakers aligned in time the ESLs have to be delayed a little. You can only do this in the digital domaine. Any other approach is a compromise you are not going to like.