Dedicated phono-pre for MM only?


Hi All,
the subject of phono-pres, specifically 'adapted' to MM came up in some related postings.

IF, and only if, MMs are much to ones liking --- why spend your buck on some 'halve backed' 60dB plus, MC gain requirement, stage? Why not consider put the $$$ into a TOP 40dB gain stage of either SS or tube?

Raul had more thoughs on the subject as he mentioned before, and might share, why he knows that a TOP MM compared to MC stage circuit requirement might NOT be -one suit fits all-.

There could even be a nice argument to fit a tube gain stage only into an otherwise SS only system!?

Again, the $buck saved on the 20dB plus circuitry could be translated into the BEST circuit for an MM.
I realise, that most such stages were simply fitted inside some older TOP pre-amps, (e.g. Jadis...).
I have not come across a **dedicated** , current 40dB stage neither in nor outside a pre-amp.

Thank you,
Axel
axelwahl
Post removed 
Hi Saudio
EAR 324, a good one in the context of MM - alas it showed some issues with too little head-room in the 20Hz region. Not a lot going on down there mostly, but still.

The 88PB would be more ===> MC targeted I'd guess.
1) affordable phono-stage with MM (Reflex?)
2) good stage with MM
3) good stage with SUT and MC (Note: not mentioned headamps i.e. Elevator)
4) top stage with MC

2) and 3) maybe on par, and MC = LO MC > 0.4mV "
Hi Axel - I think its really difficult to make these kinds of general heirarchical statements about performance, price and topology . . . for a few reasons:

- You can't assume that providing the additional required voltage gain is always going to be the biggest challenge when designing a phono preamp for use with an MC cartridge . . . it may be for some designs, but definately not all.

- The usual axiom of "price and performance don't always go together" . . . even though they do frequently, we must always be skeptical here.

- I think that the implementation of an external SUT will always be a compromise - mainly because the transformer will have to be designed in a specific way to provide a "standard" step-up ratio that works well (in terms of voltage gain and output impedance) with a "standard" MM phono input. In a phono stage such as my own, the transformer (a Jensen JT-346) has a turns ratio that is much lower than a typical SUT (thus much higher performance) and provides a perfect En/In match to the electronics that follow it, which in turn have had their gain adjusted to suit the paramters of the SUT. That is, the transformer and electronics have been designed specifically to work together, not as a "universal" add-on solution.

On the subject of accurate RIAA . . . I was actually inspired by Raul's postings to take this matter very seriously in my own design. This isn't an easy thing . . . there are specific challanges to even measuring it to better than +/- 0.01dB across a 40-dB-ish range of signal level, as most test equipment must either generate or measure it through several output/input measurement ranges. For this, I was lucky to have an APx 525 on loan as an extra test set to verify the results against the AP2700's measurements . . . suffice it to say there needs to be some very careful hand-selection of parts to even begin to come close to this level of accuracy.

And there's the question of . . . why should the preamp be so precise, when no cartridge is anywhere close to this? Well, error is error . . . and it's always statistically additive in this case. After all, our CD players and amplifiers should have extremely precise response, even though a loudspeaker can't come anywhere close . . .
Hi:

I was following the thread the last few days for a different reason than most of the previous participants. I have a Supratek Chenin that has only a MC input and I want to experiment with one of the Moving Irons made by Soundsmith that require a MM input. Currently mi analogue rig is Teres 255/Triplanar VII/Zyx Airy 3 and I am puting together a second analogue rig that would be finished in a couple of weeks. I bought a Townshend Rock III with a Moerch DP-6 and a totally refurbished Lenco L 75 (with a 70 pound plinth) with a Micro Seiki MA 505. I want to install the Soundsmith The Voice in both of those tables and see how it sounds. I can even install the Moerch in the Lenco and see what happens. That is the reason I am looking for a dedicated MM pre-pre. Thank you very much for this very informative thread and the options that you are considering. I will look for the K&K, Whest, Aqvox, Haberman and Allnic here on Audiogon and buy one of them. Regards, Pablo.
Hi Kirkus,
as always, a thoughtful and well laid out response.

As far as SUTs go, yes they need to be matched, well matched! But if done, they have some 'magic' of their own and can make an MC something more full of 'live' and vibrant.

As to this RIAA 'ping-pong' you say: "Well, error is error . . . and it's always statistically additive in this case"
Not necessarily since there are errors to the (-) and (+) side of the curve, yes?
And we are actually talking about observed 'tolerances' just not quite the same as ERROR, in my vocab anyway.
Now, tolerances can be additive or subtractive.

This would also mean that some of this 'synergy' so often mentioned, is just one of the things that make one cart sound better in a given set-up then in another.