Dynavector XV1-S and step-up

Axel, In order to avoid confusing a novice, I would take issue only with the language you used in the post you referenced above. You wrote:

"Step 2: Find out the 'natural impedance' of the trannie.
Ratio^2 * phono-pre input impedance
e.g. 31.6 * 31.6 * 47k ohm = 47 ohm for a 30dB trannie
(this will be what the cart sees if you do not use secondary or primary loading of the trannie)"

47 ohms (or 47K ohms divided by ~1000, the approx square of the turns ratio of the transformer you described) is about what the cartridge "sees" as a load if there is a 47K ohm resistor across the secondaries of the SUT, i.e., on the preamp input side. A transformer, any transformer, has no "natural impedance" per se. Transformers merely reflect impedances from primary to secondary or vice-versa.

As to the rest of this argument, I would love to hear a very high quality SUT in my own system in order to make up my own mind as to their wonderfulness. I am keeping an open mind, but in principle there are about as many possible problems with a SUT amplifying the voltage output of a very LOMC as there are with an active gain stage. The problems are just different.

Hi Lewm,
y.s.:
>>> A transformer, any transformer, has no "natural impedance" per se. Transformers merely reflect impedances from primary to secondary or vice-versa. <<<

Sir, yes Sir! B U T, I did explain how 'natural impedance' comes about --- inverted commas and all.
Also 99% of phono-pres ARE using a de-facto impedance standard of 47k, hardly ever 50k, etc.

The calculation aught to make it clear that the 'natural impedance' of a 30dB trannie will be 50ohm for a 50k ohm input impedance or 100 ohm for a....

>>> ...in principle there are about as many possible problems with a SUT amplifying the voltage output of a very LOMC as there are with an active gain stage. <<<

The problems ARE different since some more insight is required with an SUT, which is often disregarded. Loading any MC 'straight' (no SUT) is pretty much 'dead easy', often by turn of a button.

As to the results, I dare say they are VERY much different, but this does not imply that you have to LIKE it. Raul's 'ear-equalization' comes to mind immediately.
Greetings,
PS: FM_Login (Roman Bessnow, alias 'Romy the Cat') swears by his trannie. This might be a MAJOR recommendation, or an equally major turn-off - depending where you stand with this expert source.

Axel, Sorry for being pedantic. I have to agree that a lot of folks who do use SUTs do not seem to take into account the matching of the SUT to both the cartridge and to the preamp. This is why I urged Hatari to first of all listen to his built-in SUT in his Shindo preamp, because that is undoubtedly set up properly to match the input stage. I dislike comparative testing of SUTs that we see in published articles, where a guy interposes several different SUTs between the cartridge and preamp, without regard for any special measures that might optimize frequency response, etc. The author then makes spurious judgements regarding which SUT sounds best. The Jensen transformer website has a couple of excellent "white papers" (I have no idea why we use that term in the US) on SUT electronics, from which one can learn a lot about this subject.

Lewm: I have been listening to my internal phono for 2yrs... just FYI, b/c it seems some are thinking I just got it. I've been listening extensively for some time, and it sounds pretty damn good. Just trying to optimize/explore further. The key question is matching to the Dynavector which may have not been the focus of the designer of the phono stage in the Masseto.

My head is spinning, but I hopefully have a few options to try and listen to at home in the near future, will keep you posted.

Hi Lewm,
y.s.:
>>I dislike comparative testing of SUTs that we see in published articles, where a guy interposes several different SUTs between the cartridge and preamp, without regard for any special measures that might optimize frequency response, etc<<

Very true and I couldn't agree more -- unless the author had really made sure about the impedance matching, and never mentioned it? Actually hard to believe.
I agree that THOSE tests therefore be rather misleading.
Greetings,

PS: Note, there is a TYPO in the other thread: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1248136396&openflup&1&4#1
Step 2: XXXX ... "31.6 * 31.6 * 47k ohm = 47 ohm"... XXXXX

it must read:!!!! "47k ohm / 31.6 * 31.6 = 47ohm" !!!!
Very sorry for that!