2. amps-preamps
  3. 1397501648

Preamp for Aesthetix / Atma-sphere

Hi

I have the Aesthetix Io Eclipse with volume and dual power supplies, Atma-sphere MA-1 monoblocs (140 watts) and Audiokinesis Dream Maker (93 db sensitive) speakers. These are great components. My question is about system synergy, how to make them play together.

I have been running the Io direct to my amps since I first bought the Mk2 version back in 2004. At the time, I had a Krell FPB600, and in that context, it was a blessing, and a great step up from the Krell KAV 250p preamp. I'll never forget my first impression with the Io - it was like going from the wooded hills up into the mountains. There was no going back.

With volume, the Io functions as a preamp. It looks like a preamp. Someone here on A-gon said going direct is best - which I interpreted as: it IS a preamp! So I thought, OK I have a combined phono and preamp - problem fixed. But it wasn't.

From recent testing I have finally become convinced that the Io does benefit from a separarate preamp. Even if clarity and detail is better going direct from the Io to the amps, the punch and "here-ness" of the music is clearly better with a preamp in the chain, at least in my system.

Trouble is, which preamp? I am testing a small solid state Musical Innovation preamp, which helps with the punch but veils the music. An optimal solution might be the Aesthetix Callisto, preferably with dual power - but I don't have the space, and I already have a lot of tubes and tube heat. I have space for one or possibly two boxes.

From what I have heard so far, a solid state might do the job well (in my tube-rich context), however it should not impart any s-state artifacts or reduce the resolution from the Io Eclipse.

The ideal would be to test a few tube and s-state preamps, and then decide. However, this is difficult where I live, so advice is welcome.

My question relates to my own setup of course, but is relevant for everyone with a top phono stage on the one hand and amps on the other. What is best in the middle?

From recent testing I have learned that problems that I thought were related to the speakers, the phono pre, the pickup and so on, were in fact related to the preamp issue. For example, the Dream Makers straight from the Io may sound a bit lazy and washed out in the bass, very clear in mid and treble but not fully embodied. Plugging in the solid state pre, the situation becomes dramatically different, now the speakers are driving, propulsive. Very enjoyable, but some detail is lost and some transistor things added that I don't want.

So I am looking for a solution with most of the plusses, and not much of the minuses. The preamp must be fully balanced with XLR in / out.
-
Ag insider logo xs@2xo_holter
Ag insider logo xs@2x
o_holter OP
977 posts
 
Charles1dad - thanks, you make an interesting point, perhaps my preconceptions are wrong. But to my ears, the Io has the highest resolution. With the Einstein, I may not hear all the small sounds in Zappa's orchestra playing Waka Jawaka, but I get an immense sense of drive and purpose. This is information too. So it may be, you are right, with a superior component you stop thinking of details and resolution. It is "hidden" so to speak.

You also say: "the direct route appears to be omitting significant vital details of your recording. The Einstein is presenting the more complete music signal."

Well - not sure if the Einstein is more resolved or complete, they are both high quality. The main case here, rather, is that the Io needs a preamp to do its best. I don't think it is omitting anything, it is just not optimal as a preamp, even if it has volume.

It is like the Io is offering the "dots" but I need a preamp to draw the "lines" between them. There are always some dots lost (and some false lines) with the preamps I've tried so far, although less so with the Einstein. It is a give and take, as others here have commented.
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 
Hi O holter,
What i took from your comparision was the Einstein was providing sonic information that the IO alone did not. Those specific qualities you attribiute to the Einstein's insertion were benetficial(necessary?) to draw more emotion and communication. You weren't getting this(or at least not as much) with the IO running solo to your amplifier.

Based on your description The Einstein is doing " something" very right and desireable. It seems to mimic more closely what one would experience in a live setting. If the IO is more resolved and detailed then why does it not retrieve/convey the vital qualities(information) as the Einstein does? Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you wrote, it seems the Einstein is giving you more music.Do you make a distinction between "detail" and musical information?
thanks,
Charles,
jafox
1,459 posts
 
The Io's strengths are not at all detail or resolution that often is heard in the upper octaves. If you want a phono stage that is simply a leader in the class of portraying space and magic in the upper bass to upper mids, this is it…..in spades! It can be so addicting. But hearing modern designs with far fewer gain stages and passive components, you then quickly learn what the Io gives up in clarity, better delineation between notes (especially piano as they are not so exaggerated) and more appreciation to the upper octave instruments, and percussion.
audiolabyrinth's avatar
audiolabyrinth
4,555 posts
 
O_ holter, What tube are you talking about sounded more solid state?, Also, what have you learned that sounded best for 12ax7 tube sockets?, and, If you do not mind, please give your full impressions of the 5814 cbs Hytron tube, A note here, I do not like tubes that do not have the tube magic, my tast is, if a tube sounds to revealing like 6h30 tubes, It sounds like solid state, I have so much resolution now, I would be crazy to get more!, this is because of the cables I have, I do have tube magic going on, However, they are stock tubes, and believe I may can get even more magic if possible.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
o_holter OP
977 posts
 
Charles1dad & Jafox, have you heard the Io Eclipse (not Signature), over a prolonged period of time? I have not heard a better phono stage, although I have not done a lot of comparison. Many reviewers agree. Of course, there are others, newer, better in some respects and so on, but for now, with my tastes, I am satisfied. The fact that it needs a preamp is no mystery. I don’t get fifty percent of the signal from Io, fifty from the Einstein – I get 100 percent from the Io, or almost 100. A good thing about the Einstein, precisely, is that it doesn’t add much on its own. My ears confirm what Fremer and other reviewers of the Tube have written. The question, which is best, is therefore less relevant for me, than: do they fit together? Changing tubes the last days has improved the sound. I am getting more positive. I am now trying Siemens 6922 in the phono inputs and Telefunken 12au7 - perhaps the best so far. I will post more on the Hytron and the RCA later.
Audiolabyrinth: it was the Tube (the preamp), not a specific tube, that was solid-state-sounding, according to earlier comments. I agree with what you say about ‘magic’, or musicality. All the tubes discussed above are NOS (Siemens, Tele, CBS Hytron, RCA). In general I would say that the best thing you can do is to get rid of the stock Russian or China tubes, and invest in NOS from a serious source, starting with the most sensitive tubes. The biggest change, for me, was going from stock Russian 12ax7 to Telefunken in the Io’s gain stages, some years ago. Selecting between NOS is more a matter of taste. What kind of preamp, phono or digital source do you use? Too many 6h30 stock tubes with too much “resolution”? This sounds like a curable problem, although I have no direct experience with that type of tube.
More to discover