Need to re-discover analog - please help

Per Opalchips comment concerning 98% of the differences people think they hear from turntables"-

I have a Scout and a Garrard 301 both setup with the same arm, the same cart on the exact same isolation playing into the same pre, power and speakers. Currently both are playing Neil Young's Harvest.

FYI-the Garrard is new to me (1 week here), and I have been putting it through it's courses. It's just coincidence I happened to come across Opalchips comment and am in a position to put it to the test.

The difference between the two is no small matter. Nor is it something only the most critical listener would identify easily. I will not get into qualitative differences here; but I will say the differences in tonality, imaging, soundstaging and all that audiophile mumbo jumbo are absolutely startling.

I think it bears mentioning that precious few tables "spin at a constant speed and impart no (or virtually no) vibration to the lp"

Springbok10, I do not have all the history at my fingertips but it took a long time for home audio to adopt what the pro world (of necessity due to long cable runs) had used for years. The longstanding prevalence of single ended connection probably had somthing to do with the dominance of a few manufacturers (RCA? connectors) in the early home entertainment industry of the 50's.

The market for phono equipment dropped off drastically after the introduction of CD's in the early eighties. Many of the turntables of that time even came with hardwired RCA phono cables installed! All this was a good 10+ years before the home audio industry began offering balanced connections -- at first just on the better brands like Audio Research, Mark Levinson, etc.

Nobody was really paying much attention to developing new and better phono preamps until (relatively) recently. And let's face it, it's a small market at best. That means that a.) the prices are going to be disproportionately high due to so few units sold, and b.) manufacturers want to capture the largest number of potential customers in that already small market. Since most of the market (still) owns single ended equipment, the designs being produced are largely single ended. But I see that beginning to change.

As for the ones you mention, I honestly don't remember. I'm pretty sure the Manley does, but what you mainly get for all that extra money is a versatility that you probably won't require, since you're only going to be using one cartridge (I presume?) I'm certain the Audio Research phono preamp offers balanced ins and outs (and don't discount that one, it's supposedly pretty terrific -- but that's just what I read, I haven't heard their latest).

If I didn't have my beloved ML 25S, I might consider a tube unit for my all SS system. In your case, as I mentioned earlier, I think a great SS unit (like the TE Groove+) would compliment your system beautifully. Additionally, it could be left running all the time, which for that kind of device guarantees performance stability. Of course, you could leave a tube phono preamp on 24/7 but you don't need that!

The Whest has gotten great press, but like new computer software, I won't buy an audio component until it's been in the market a couple of years. (No beta-testing for me!) I'm also no fan of the battery powered units. Not because they're battery powered -- that's a great idea -- but rather because the production cost savings gained by the elimination of the power supply have apparently not (yet) gone into making a top notch battery powered phono preamp, if you get my drift . . . . . . . . . . .

.

Nsgarch brings up a topic I've wondered about. Certainly with true balanced operation a phono stage would enjoy a lower noise floor; at least theoretically. In practice, and only because I've been lucky enough to listen locally to a variety of great phono stages in a world class system, I doubt that the benefits will matter. Of course, I've been wrong before. It's just that having listened as extensively as I have it's getting difficult to believe things will get significantly better. Silent is silent and that's what I'm hearing from almost every great phono stage I've heard. It's like asking how black can black get. Thanks for bringing this up Nsgarch as it's interesting.

Lugnut -- I may not have been clear: I wasn't referring to necessarily less noise/hum in the phono preamp itself. (My single ended unit is as "quiet as a chair.") I was referring to the noise/hum picked up by single ended interconnects vs. balanced interconnects. Particularly the run between the tonearm and the phono preamp; which is where most such problems begin.

Of course, having balanced inputs generally results in a better signal-to-noise ratio within the component as well.

.

Nsgarch,

The extent of what you say has not been lost on me. And, I do find this to be very interesting. I am not questioning that things can get better because repeatedly through my life in this hobby the performance bar has been raised in regard to state of the art. What really amazes me about this is the amount of information held within the grooves of old recordings. I can only afford to be a "trailing edge" kind of audiophile, buying gear later than the "cutting edge" audiophiles. With each improvement in my own gear I rediscover Louis, Ella, Duke and The Count. Just as I've experienced the positive effect of using a supertweeter (which makes little sense to me since I cannot actually hear what it's doing) and accept it in spite of my minds reluctance to do so, similar benefits of which you write are the only area I can imagine progress being made. I cannot hear any hum or noise in the single ended designs being used in SOTA analog today. Like I said "how black can black get?" My sense, based on high frequencies beyond what we can hear increasing the presentation in the supertweeter example, is similar gains may be had by employing true balanced design as you've described. I find it very interesting and hope that someday I'll be able to experience it. Good point, indeed.