I don’t think you can fairly make a case for SUT over high gain phono on the basis of simplicity. A high gain stage may consist of one gain device at the input of what otherwise is an MM stage. No extra ICs, no outboard chassis, much shorter connections.
Step Up Transformers….Are they Worth the Trouble?
Some of you may aware of my Garrard 301 project, it’s now very close to completion. The plinth finally shipped from Hungry after 3 months of long wait.
Given my last experience with Hana Umami Red, I would like to take things to the next level. Which brings me to mating low output cart with a SUT. Every review I’ve read so far suggests when the SUT-MC match is right, the end result is heavenly. The bass is right, the midrange is clear, and most importantly, the highs are relaxed and extended—not rolled off.
I am not saying you can’t get great sound without a SUT but it appears with a properly matched SUT, sound can be quite magical.
Thought this would be the right time to get input from experienced users here since I am still contemplating my cartridge and outboard phonostage options.
My preference would be to go with a tube phono…I kinda miss tinkering with tubes :-)
My system, Garrard 301 (fully refurbished), Reed 3P tonearm, Accuphase E-650 with built-in AD50 analog board ➡️ Tannoy Canterbury’s.
Cart and phono under consideration through my dealer,
Fuuga - Output : 0.35 mVrms | Impedance : 2.5 Ω (1kHz)
Phonostage - Tron Convergence and Konus Audio Phono Series 1000
The cart - MC combination, I am lusting after is Etsuro Urushi Bordeaux MC with their Etsuro Transformer.
https://www.etsurojapan.com/product/bordeaux
The other transformer is EMIA, cooper or silver version.
Your input is appreciated!
- ...
- 352 posts total
If it hasn't already been pointed out: the fact that you enjoy Tannoy Canterbury as your main speakers, and have stuck with them for years (like me) - I think makes it more likely you'll prefer the SUT + MM approach. The cartridges you cite (Umami, Etsuro, Fuuga) are electrically a good match for SUT. There are so many nice premium SUT options and new contenders today, many of which I haven't tried, e.g. Consolidated Audio, EMIA, Sculpture A. Over time I've settled on using my EAR MC-3 and MC-4 the most. If the newer options go beyond that, it's quite a bonus. Used a SUT with tube MM stages for years because it felt like the "natural fit", and indeed it's hard to even find a bad match there. VAC, Herron, Audio Research, Hagerman - all wonderful results with the EAR SUT's, which I generally preferred to the built-in MC options, sometimes by a lot. Of them all, the Hagerman Trumpet Reference actually made it a close call in some scenarios - and even won out in cases where I needed a little more air & zip on top to balance things out (depends on the system). And the VAC itself uses Lundahl LL1931 SUT for its built-in MC stage - but Lundahls are my least favorite SUT! Now that I've also got a Meridian 502 w/ MM stage I'm playing with in a 2nd system, I can confirm solid state MM's work great with SUT too! In fact that's a quirky little "sounds better than it should" MM stage. Its balanced line-stage is reasonably transparent, but I prefer a tube line stage over it for many of the same reasons I prefer a SUT. |
"Richness of Tone" is a term I use, that I have experienced being perceived, depending on device used, rhat has variance in how the presence is substantiated. I like to detect a presence, but it will need to be subtle to get my vote. Another may find that a much more weighty and what ai class as ovetbearing is to be detected to get their vote. Another may class any detection of a Richness of Tone from a add on device, as being iadding a unnecessary noise. Where they. would prefer to add a Richness of Tone through considering other options. What really matters, where an End Sound is being sought by an individual, that is unique to the individuals preferences, is that the different perceptions that are able to be created, are experienced and that the individual makes their choice for what is most attractive and wanting to be maintained. |
Dear @lewm : " I don’t think you can fairly make a case for SUT over high gain phono on the basis of simplicity. A high gain stage may consist of one gain device at the input of what otherwise is an MM stage. No extra ICs, no outboard chassis, much shorter connections. "
I agree with you and the problem is that exist to many tube owners and ( with all respect ) a high technical ignorance levels ( manufacturers know that but they are doing the bussiness. Taking advantage of the $$$$$ market. ) along that several of us in reality can't appreciate the real MUSIC and almost all go for what they like no matter what even that if what they are listen it is wrong against the active high gain stage. These problems makes that gentlemans as mulveling and all the ones in this thread are happy with SUTs. Even they don't try to help the OP and they do not like to analize the whole subject in objective/subjective equilibrium.
After my post where I mentioned the facts about what the OP want to do no one of these SUT advocates gentlemans makes any single comment: dead silence and I can infere from that that they has to arguments against all those facts other that our famous: " I like it " that is a end of a dialogue. Really pity but such is audio life. @lalitk Grado Epoch.
R.
|
- 352 posts total