What is the Phono stage you have finished with?

I believe that what Atmasphere was getting at was not that "the connectivity problem with whatever is downstream" cannot be surmounted, but the fact that doing so turns the phono stage into a "phono stage with a robust enough output stage to be the equivalent of a line stage with a phono stage built in and then with the other stuff that a line stage does taken out."

I don't think he thinks it is impossible at all. I am absolutely confident that Ralph could make a world class standalone phono stage which could drive an amp through a very long cable. That said, as he says, the output stage of that phono stage would resemble his preamp, and I am sure that he thinks that there are very few phono stages out there which have the same ability to drive an amp as the Atmasphere preamps do, and if they do, they might as well stick a switch and a couple of extra inputs and a volume control on it and call itself a full-function preamp.

I think he may have overstated things when he said "I don't see any phono stage that is really designed to do that" because I think there are several designers who do actually stick all that gain stage robustness in there. Saying something like that will almost always provide the opportunity for rebuttal because it's a big wide world out there. But it does not negate the rest of what he said.

What he did not say but may be inferred as his position is also relevant. Having to make two top-notch power supplies and two top-notch output stages just to stick the phono stage into a separate box from the preamp/line stage is an avoidable expense and coloration.

I bet even Dan_Ed thinks that Nick Doshi could probably come up with a "passable" 2-chassis or 4-chassis preamp with the phono stage built in... and it would probably be cheaper to do (and might have fewer chassis) than the combination of a standalone pre and phono.

Keep in mind that all of that proselytizing (mine) comes from someone who just bought a standalone MM stage where I will need a headamp/SUT and a preamp to make it work.

T_bone, you got it. Thanks.

What you're describing are not connectivity issues. Those are cable quality issues and personal preferences. Nothing more. New models of components are introduced every year. Does that mean people's "old" systems are no longer any good and must be replaced? Does that mean that cables between amps and preamps are replaced every year just because there are improvements there? No to both.

But that's not what you REALLY said originally. What you said was (read very carefully!):

"You see, one of the functions of a line stage is to control the interconnect cable. I don't see any phono stage that is really designed to do that, so the interconnect between the phono section and whatever follows (line stage, power amp) is critical. [snip undisputed passive volume control and function statement]."

So you can see that what you said is a WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT than when you changed your explanation to something else completely. What you said had to do with the quality of a phono stage being able to "control the interconnect cable" as if there are not differences between interconnects between other components, downstream of the preamp, or between a "properly designed" phono stage and a preamp. But there are, as well as there are differences between the wire that can be used inside an integrated preamp. Does that mean that the preamp needs to be rewired every time there is an improvement in point-to-point wire?

But the issue remain that you said that you know of no phono stage that has the same attention to its output than the output of a preamp. You also implied that since a preamp is designed to "control the interconnect" that there are no differences in downstream interconnects but there are between phono stages and line stage preamps.

I mean, that is what you said. Right? That's where I disagree with you.

If I understand the comments by Rauliruegas, and repeated by Notec and Atmasphere, the theory is that a phono stage that is integrated into the preamplifier is better than one that is separate because the interconnection forms a kind of "weak link". This statement sound generally incorrect. Keep in mind that the signal output from the phono stage should be about as strong as the signal output from a CD player or tuner. I mean, the point of the phono stage is to take a signal that is too weak to be input to the preamplifier (i.e. the signal from the cartridge) and amplify it to a level that is suitable for the preamplifier (there is, of course also the task of RIAA equalization as well). If the signal from the phono stage is weaker, then you probably have a problem of too low a gain level in the phono stage.

An advantage in having the phono stage separate from the preamplifier is that the phono stage is typically the highest gain component in your system, and it receives signals that are significantly weaker than those elsewhere in the system. Those weak signals are prone to interference from nearby stronger signals, so by keeping those signals in a separate box, you can amplify the weak signal while minimizing interference and then once the signal has been amplified, it can then be introduced into the rest of the system.