Hi Piedpiper, I am a proud owner of the Essential 3150 and have had a chance to compare it with my various former preamp's and phonostages. These include an EAR 324, Audio Research LS25 MKII, Conrad Johnson PS16, Croft classic, and an Atma-sphere MP-3 (among a few other valve and ss models).
I think Groovey's point is valid and that the Essential does not impart any detectable signature of its own. What it does above other models is provide an optimum platform for the recorded source to flow through with an unbelievable degree of accuracy. This includes accuracy in timbre, pace, pitch, soundstage (width and depth), frequency extremes (top and bottom), midrange, dynamics and all against an unplumbably low soundfloor.
It might even seem to be an anti-hifi piece of equipment to the extent that it removes the numerous colourations that are inherent to much hifi and leaves only the musicians and their performances before the listener. This meant that it took me more time to get used to - with me having been unknowingly led by the industry and its champion's to an appreciation of the sound of different pieces of hardware.
Although I do not think it unacceptable that the more coloured and traditional approaches to performance can satisfy and provide a pleasurable listening experience, the Essential is indubitably something else. I believe (and he might strongly resent my assumptions) that this form of musical portrayal is what underpins Raul's many comments on valve amp's and his preferences for specific cartridges (Allaerts MC2), cables (Anaylsis Plus Silver), etc. It also underpins (IMHO) his emphasis on live performances as the true reference for hifi.
As I say, I think it has no signature or colourations and is only limited by the quality of the equipment that you select to accompany it. In this sense, it might be difficult to compare it to other pieces of equipment but I hope that my personal account is of some use and that more people have a chance to give the Essential a go: it really seems a phenomenal piece of equipment to me.
Kindest
I think Groovey's point is valid and that the Essential does not impart any detectable signature of its own. What it does above other models is provide an optimum platform for the recorded source to flow through with an unbelievable degree of accuracy. This includes accuracy in timbre, pace, pitch, soundstage (width and depth), frequency extremes (top and bottom), midrange, dynamics and all against an unplumbably low soundfloor.
It might even seem to be an anti-hifi piece of equipment to the extent that it removes the numerous colourations that are inherent to much hifi and leaves only the musicians and their performances before the listener. This meant that it took me more time to get used to - with me having been unknowingly led by the industry and its champion's to an appreciation of the sound of different pieces of hardware.
Although I do not think it unacceptable that the more coloured and traditional approaches to performance can satisfy and provide a pleasurable listening experience, the Essential is indubitably something else. I believe (and he might strongly resent my assumptions) that this form of musical portrayal is what underpins Raul's many comments on valve amp's and his preferences for specific cartridges (Allaerts MC2), cables (Anaylsis Plus Silver), etc. It also underpins (IMHO) his emphasis on live performances as the true reference for hifi.
As I say, I think it has no signature or colourations and is only limited by the quality of the equipment that you select to accompany it. In this sense, it might be difficult to compare it to other pieces of equipment but I hope that my personal account is of some use and that more people have a chance to give the Essential a go: it really seems a phenomenal piece of equipment to me.
Kindest