Advice wanted on mid range setup

Jjmali, having a bad day?

Jrd351 and Jjmali,
The man heard what he heard. If he listens to my sytem he'll hear it again. It doesn't take half an hour to hear the superiority of a good analog rig, half a minute might be enough. As to the choice of music auditioned, who are we to say? Surely he knows his own tastes.

Rlips,
I can add little to Twl's recommendation, which will give you an immensely satisfying rig that is much better than mid-level, and much handsomer than an SME! My Twl-ophiled analog front end also cost about $7K, see my system for details.

I chose stepup transformers because I already had a MM phono stage in my preamp. I am very happy with the BentAudio stepups: variable loading and enough gain to bury all tube noise. Strongly recommended. Even some well regarded tube MC phono stages like the $4K Aesthetix Rhea are admitted to be a bit noisy. I might keep the stepups even if I had one of those.

Dougdeacon good point if all he is going to listen to is the chesky reisue lp. I wonder why he wanted 70 copies of it (so far). Happy listening to him and you. By the way I'm having a great day. By the way again, I am enjoying my vinyl collection again on a modest denon dp 52f with a new shure m5.

If you do not think the PH-3 will provide enough gain for your cartridge, then consider the Linn Linto, available for about $1100 used. 60 dB of gain, DEAD quiet, no tubes though. Still, I used it for a while in my system before returning to the PH-3 and was very impressed with its sound.

Wow! "I am always amazed by the drastic statements made by people like you with no real basis of fact"

People like me? How do you know what I am "like?"

Regarding Sound by Singer, we went in with no pre tenses whatsoever. My brother in law had purchased some equipment from them in the past, and, as we were in the neighboorhood, we stopped by. We got into a great discussion with Mike about the merits of digital vs. analog. I clearly told him that I was not going to buy anything that day, and told him the content of my system.

Mike seemed to have time, and he suggested that we go all the way to the back room. At that point, it was three music lovers, talking about music, equipment, and life in general. He seemed very enthusiastic about doing the comparison.

Now, maybe this was all just good salesmanship, but, having 94 sales people in my employ, I do believe that he was geniunely enthusuastic about this. I mentioned that we were taking up a lot of time, and he very emphatically stated that he was having just as much fun as we were.

As far as reference to live music goes, a little background: I have two degrees, one in Electrical Engineering, the other in music literature. I studied trumpet with the Empire Brass quintet in Tanglewood, and been going to live concerts for over 20 years.

Three days before the demo, I was in the audience at Carnege hall, listening to a live orchestra.

Being an engineer, I had long ago just assumed that digital had to be better, as the numbers are superior. I did NOT want to consider that I would be getting into an old, non mainstream medium.

I know what I heard: the analog sounded more like a real orchestra. Period. Believe me, I would rather spend the 7k on more cd's, but, I know what I heard.

Also, I am aware of the obvious fact that what I heard was not "normal". I have since heard other analog rigs, and confirmed the virtues. Maybe not on the same level, but enough to carefully decide that a well purchased used rig here on audiogon is an experiment worth doing.

Anyway, aside from your two posts, people here have been very helpful. It seems as the synergy between components is the most important issue, especially the gain issue.

Another question: Is there any technical reason why the "better" cartridge have such low output? Is the idea to keep the coils as small as possible so as to have the lowest moving mass? Are there any very nie cartrides that might have higher output?

Thanks again