K&K any comments?

And no, 4yanx, the rest of my system was not the culprit in the K&K's inability to project sound into the room. If you know Zu Definitions and any decent 845 amp, you know this is not the case. The system is highly involving, dynamic, spatially convincing and infused with jump. All the other phono stages took full advantage of those traits. With the K&K in, it all sank back. It was like listening to really good phono in 1975, by comparison. Pleasant and smooth but not projected. More to the point, my digital player has more projection with plain Redbook CD than the K&K, with same performance material, and that isn't true with the compared phono pres.

Phil

Fine, Phil, you have your opinion, and so do I. Fair enough. I know that I get plenty of projection. I personally think labelling something to sound like a 1975 phono is just plain silly since many made in 1975 sound better than those made last week. Given the circuit in the K7K I am very surprised that you didn't fry those 6922's you tried in there. I'd have thought that they'd have run just a tad on the torrid side.... Yes, I have heard the Zu's and, while I have heard very good 845 amps, the Druids were not my cup of tea in the systems in which I heard them, so maybe tastes are the difference here.

Raul, to the extent I should reply to you at all, I would have to check regarding the exact "other" equipment used when that comparison over two days was done (it is in my notes somehere). As I recall, one of the amps used was a super high-end Nagra and the other I know was a Boulder 2060, so I don't think the "resolution" was an issue, as much as you'd probably like to make that inference. The speakers I do not recall at all.

I also swapped the K&K out with several other phono stages borrowed and begged from friends and, in my system, it sounds almost directly opposite to what Phil describes. I go with a Platinum Edition McCormack DNA-225 through a Bent NOH passive and into Vandersteen Model 5A's so, while maybe not the final word in resolution, it'll hold its own with a number of systems and is hardly 70's vintage sounding (assuming that Phil's prupose is to deride with the 70's sounding analogy). Plus, things like "emotionally remote" and "less expressie music" do not do a whole lot in describing to me how something sounds other than to come across as so subjective that we'd better just leave this as a difference in opinions and/or ears. :-)

Hi Raul. Where have you been lately? Phil, and others, I did not mean to discourage input. I was under the impression that Padrillo had already made his decision and just wanted to support him a bit. I completely agree with comments about system synergy and personal preference. That said, I am curious about some of the comments made about the K&K hybrid and leading edge etching, if that's what Phil was saying. This just makes me wonder how cartridge and phono stage matching might have played into this. If that information was given I admit that I've missed it. It's been a pretty busy last few days for me so I've tried to keep up with one eye on this thread.

Phil, I am most interested in the Zu's. If I'm correct about the efficiency you have the Druid?

Best to all,

Dan

Not that it makes much difference, to me any way, but in case others bvesides Raul wondered about peripheral equipment:
Amps
Nagra VPA monos (did someone say 845's?)
Boulder 2060
Preamps:
Boulder 2010
Lamm L2
Tables:
SME 30/2 w/SMW V/Koetsu Rosewood Signature
Basis 2800 Signature w/Schroeder Reference/Van den Hul Frog
Speakers:
Cello (Grand Masters, I think, need ot double check)

So, this is not MY systems, but IO wish it was - decidedly one on which a piece could be objectively assessed, anyway.

At any rate, I hope everyone enjoys their music this weeekend.

4yanx, Dan,

For the record, while I do have Zu Druids on a second system and did listen to the K&K there, my evaluation and comments of record were in the context of the higher resolution Zu Definitions I have on my primary system. Dan, I'd be happy to discuss both Zu speakers in detail with you. You're welcome to send email with your questions.

4yanx: You're right, many circa 1975 phono sections of preamps were better than separate phono preamps on the market today, but none had the dynamic life and projection, combination of transients + tone that are possible now with better components and more evolved understanding of what the cartridge is handing the pre. Most circa 1975 phono sections were pleasingly euphonic compared to the better higher-accuracy phono stages available now which also benefit from being discrete, with their own power supplies. My 70s reference is not uncomplimentary, merely descriptive for those of us who owned that generation of equipment then -- Audio Research SP3a-1, for instance.

I wouldn't try current Russian 6922s in the K&K, but the NOS tubes I cited are quite robust, especially the German Post CCa. I experienced no problems while I had those tubes in the circuit. Perhaps the K&K would have truncated their tube life if used long-term. I was experimenting, so willing to accept that risk. Oh, I also tried the K&K into a Django TVC with fully baked S&Bs. Still no change in basic signature.

Druids and Definitions have some distinct differences. If you heard Druids and did not care for them, that reaction may not apply to Defnitions. Again, my eval is in the Definition context.

As for my sonic vocabularly, it expresses what is meaningful to me. I fully recognize that I may not be describing sound to the prevailing AA/S'phile/HiFi+ standards.

Phil