which is better ? MC phono stage or MM+step-up ?

No, SUTs are usually better than pre preamps. I have not heard one but the ZYX pre preamp, or also called "head-amp" is very good. Most of the pre preamps I have heard are not nearly as good as a good SUT. They tend to have hum and noise and a limited band width. SUTs,can also have hum problems, but it is usually a relationship with a ground or a cable.
It is best if you can keep the tone arm cable going to the SUT as short as possible and to use good shielded wire.
Check out "Bob's Devices" for tips on grounding.Bob is a super nice guy that is very helpful and offers nice SUTs at very good prices. he helped me with my DIY project and I didn't even buy anything from him.
how cool is that?

e

I think one of the best pre-preamps out there at a reasonable price is the Hagerman Piccolo. Dead quiet and with a few judicious parts upgrades it is utterly transparent and beautiful to listen to. Now I haven't heard a lot of these but I did compare this to the famed TX103's and I came away feeling the TX103's were colored.

IME you can get excellent results with an SUT but the cartridge and the SUT must be matched for best results, including all the loading issues, as cartridges have loading issues and SUTs have loading issues of their own and neither can be ignored. That is why they have to matched, so that when the SUT is properly loaded, so is the cartridge.

However I have found the transformers anywhere in the audio chain represent a loss of bandwidth and detail with added distortion. It is in the phono section that they potentially represent the least effect, but as they are located at the very first place the signal will pass through, any issues they have are compounded by the gain and distortion of everything downstream. Now that might not be so bad if an active stepup (that is also being considered) is poorly designed, but it is obvious that a properly designed phono section that has enough gain will give any SUT a run for the money.

Sometimes though you do find certain people who cannot tolerate any noise (and therefore may prefer digital on this account, despite analog being better in every other way). For anyone who has noise issues SUTs represent an excellent compromise. IOW it is possible, using and SUT, to get signal to noise ratios in the -90 db range.

In a nutshell: for maximum transparency and bandwidth go direct if you can. For minimum noise go with an SUT.

With less than state of the art equipment IMMV!

That explains why I like the SUT, because I don't have SOTA equipment. Far from it.
Ralph on the other hand makes state of the art gear and I am sure is well versed in the potentialities from the various methods of vinyl playback.
Being a old audiophile, I would admit that I have some bias towards some methods. I prefer lomcs,SUTs,electrostatics and tubes. With the exception of lomcs and tubes I am very much "out of vogue". Especially when you consider my Acoustats require considerable power and present somewhat challenging loads for amplifiers. In contrast the vogue is low power SETs and horns or very high efficiency dynamic "sound coffins". LOL! I couldn't resist.

One thing that most of us agree on: vinyl rules! So whatever method you choose or prefer,it is (IMHO) still better than digital.

We all like what we like. That is one of the things that makes this hobby so interesting.

Thank you Emorrisiv!