MC transformers - what do they sound like?

Dear Gregadd: Well that is yout point of view and I respect it.

I never speak about " lazy " but now that you are mentioned maybe some of them were lazy. I speak about " they don't care about music and quality sound reproduction ".

If you like the SUTs go a head, no problem: is up to you. My point of view is still the same: " a cheap/easy/wrong/worst solution for a complex problem " and I can prove it. Can you prove that the SUT is a better solution ( better quality music reproduction ) than a good high gain phonopreamp design?.

You are a wise person and I can't understand why do you have that attitude of " SUT/designers protector?. The proponents of the SUTs are against you and against all of us: can you understand that?

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Raul, you have an opinion which you have relentlessly and repeatedly stated regarding transformers and low output MCs. Why can't you just accept that some people may disagree with your considered opinion?

Raul what I learned ealry is this -insufficicient gain in the phono stage can make a great system sound meidocre. Agree? Y/N?
What we need is a preamp that has sufficient gain to drive the cornucopia of excellent low output mc cartridges? Agree y/n?
This means that we need a preamp with about 60-80db gain in the phono stage.Agree Y/N?
Optimally we also need about 80-100db S/N ratio(unweighted). AgreeY/N?
Luckily there exist a number of of preamps capable of this with no problem. They do tend to be expensive. Agree Y/N?
What does the audiophile do who is either unable to or uwilling to trash his current preamp in favor of one that can drive a low output preamp?
He can avail himself of an outboard pre-pre amp. Or he can avail himself of an outboard transformer. I took into consideration one parameter-noise.
The more you magnify the signal the more you magnify the noise (Ask DR. Dolby). Transformers make it easier to magnify the signal with less amplification of the noise. IME. Of course noise and gain have always been a bigger problem in tubes than solid state. Agree Y/N?
BTW you list a very impressive group of manufacturers who used SUT. you don't really mean to suggest they don't care about music?

Raul.

What do you think of Tim De Paravancini from EAR. He uses transformers extensively in all his products including MC pickups. His EAR 834 is an excellent unit, I am listening to one now and it has a fluidity that the Pass Xono or Ayre Px5 don't seem to have. - not sure what I like better at the moment.

What about this guy from TNT review site who states that
"Active devices are drifting with temperature, operating point and under work, and if input signals are smaller than 1mV, the drift gets into the way of the music. Bass lines are muddy then and drum players seem to play like if they are drunk. So the music is lacking immediateness, and rather sounds hollow, uninvolving, uninteresting".

see his review
http://www.tnt-audio.com/accessories/mc_3xfr_e.html

cheers Shane

Gregadd sez

Transformers make it easier to magnify the signal

These trannies increase voltage at the expense of current -- they can't increase the energy, as you doubtless know.

Downunder: if you're interested in improving your EAR, check a relevant thread by Thorsten Loesch (an advanced diyer)[url+http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=2052]here[/url].
As to the note by the TNT writer, he's referring to *circuits* (and many circuits fit that description); components used in a circuit have this bad habit of drifting with temp (& voltage for that matter).

If what Raul is to make sense, he is using a very well stabilised active circuit and he's using his components in their optimum operating region. That's difficult and painstaking to design and implement -- but better (even in theory) than using a tranny. But let's face it: as Gregadd seems to imply, a good tranny, while expensive, is nowhere near the cost and rarerity of an outstanding fully active 80-100db riaa.