MC phono stage without transformer?

Rccc- cost is of course an issue for most of us, but IIRC, Raul's product (which I have not heard) is as he calls it a "phonolinepreamp" or as most of us call it, a full function pre-amp. If its $12k, that's not out of line for v good similar products like VAC Ren, Atma-sphere MP-1, Asthetix, etc. BAT VK-51 line stage plus standalone phono stage is more than that. Manley Steelhead phonostage is $7k alone w/o a line stage. And that does not consider the bleeding edge products like Audio-note. High end SUTs seem to start at just under $1K, but you still need a phono stage and line stage (integrated or stand-alone) plus cabling and PCs to go with them.

An SUT can be a cost effective solution for sure; perhaps Raul's choice of words "cheap solution for complex problem" could have been different (inexpensive or economical solution to complex problem), but let's not forget that he is not a native English speaker.

Analog rigs are transducers that have very complex mechanical, electrical, and audio issues, so its not surprising that there is "more than one way to skin the cat" and of course many listener's have different priorities and so may favor one design solution over another. For many of us, cost is also a factor. and every design is a compromise in some way. So the "right solution" varies from individual to individual and from rig to rig. Viva la difference!!!

Swampwalker, I completely agree but want to defend the lowly transformer. Lets not forget that the majority of recordings were obsessing over were made with microphones going into the same transformers at the input of the mic pre so your listening to a transformer whether you want to or not.

Dear Swampwalker/Rccc: I agree with both of you because ( as I point it out in my post ) the subject of price is an issue and not everyone can afford an expensive solution even if it is a lot better one.

Anyway, things are that I would like that instead that the analog industry stay making noise about the new SUTs ( that IMHO don't bring any good to the music reproduction and stop the growing up area. ) it will be better that that noise was on the " news " about Phonolinepreamps that could bring several improve steps in our analog perfection quest performance.

It is a SHAME ( for me ) that the Editors of Stereophile/TAS and the like don't do nothing about when their reviewers support with a very high enthusiams the SUTs, how can we ( the analog industry ) grow up? how the designers/builders of active high gain stages ( like Atmasphere, dartzeel, Doshi and many others ) could go to lower prices when the people that are wealthy goes too for the SUTs because a little non know-how about and too much of those professional reviewers that support it?

I'm in favor of better an affordable quality performance for all of us and of all us can/could help for that happen but not like in the SUT case where almost everyone: customers, reviewers and audio dealers forgot a little about quality for business and I think that we can have both quality/business at the same time.

Well it's enough about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

I agree with Raul on nearly every point save that of the fact that tubes can work very well indeed with low output cartridges, direct.

Rccc, while it is true that there are transformers that were in the signal path in a lot of the recordings you favor, it is misleading at best to say that these are the **same** transformers as in the case of an SUT. Mic input transformers have different requirements as do line output transformers or the output transformer of the tube cutting amp for the LP.

You might be curious to know what an LP could sound like if some of **those** transformers were eliminated; the answer is "better!"

"High end audio" supports a diverse community: tubes, transistors, horns, CDs, LPs, headphones... there are people who are trying to get the best sound they can, those who buy only on cache, those who only care about the music and those for whom the experience of live music in the room is their only goal.

Raul and I represent two aspects of this community wherein we have the same goal of no-holds-barred experience of live music in the home, but he is solid state and I do it with tubes. In both our cases, since we are able to work with some of the best equipment available, the experience of the degradation that transformers bring is easily revealed. This is not so easy for those who have to struggle with a budget, who have sorted out how to get their hands on a low output cartridge but not figured out how to get the gain for it: the SUTs represent a compromise and as good as they get, they will always continue to **be** a compromise.

Raul and I would prefer to work without compromise to the best of our abilities.

A serious problem we all face on audio forums is that audiophiles all use the same terms but we don't have a good measure of the intensity of experience that comes with each term, regardless of the term. So at some point a leap of faith is required and often that leap runs short of expectation :)

In a nutshell, the more resolution you are able to get out of your system, the more artifact you will hear from SUTs.

Atmasphere, I should have said some of the same transformers used for mic pres are also used for mc step up. Im thinking of peerless, byer,neuman and jensen whos mic trans were used for mc step up before they started making purpose built trans for phono. Im using a peerless 4722 which I believe was originally for mic pre input. I agree its far from ideal but they still sound very very good. Making a tube stage that can properly load and amplify a low output mc with no trans is no small feat, my hat is off to you I hope one day I can experience it in my system. Great to have your input (so to speak)