| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Analog Playback» The last phonocorrector: “End of Life" Phonostage (285 posts, 14 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 14 of 15 (285 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 11 12 13 14 15 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Where are our good phonostages?..  Omnigon Tubes...  Analog Playback Forum     61  444042  05-31-2004
  »  New  The Expressive Technologies SU-1..  “too bright” or “resolution” or “details” with SUT prim...  Analog Playback Forum     33  266333  12-30-2004
  »  New  EAR 834P Modification Guide..  Copper air caps...  Analog Playback Forum     38  424345  02-09-2006
  »  New  My Analog Playback: the fat lady has sung..  My analog setup update....  Analog Playback Forum     9  84627  04-04-2006
  »  New  Phono stages with SU-1..  SU-1...  Analog Playback Forum     4  46408  11-23-2007
  »  New  Chasing utopian better phono interconnect...  Did I miss something?...  Analog Playback Forum     6  79566  06-05-2008
  »  New  Buying a last cartridge...  Lucky you...  Analog Playback Forum     80  570376  09-05-2008
  »  New  EAR 834P mods..  Copper air caps...  Analog Playback Forum     38  424345  11-04-2008
  »  New  AMR PH-77: just another phonostage or more?..  Oh, yeah... the sound of the Thing Itself......  Analog Playback Forum     11  87766  07-05-2009
  »  New  An interesting Russian pnonocorrector...  Uber-tweeky phono topologies deconstructed...  Analog Playback Forum     9  57600  03-01-2010
  »  New  Expressive Technologies SU-1 and cartridge output and i..  MV and Ohms...  Analog Playback Forum     2  20581  07-07-2011
  »  New  How to run MM-type cartridge into MC phonostage?..  Quite interesting....  Analog Playback Forum     6  39760  11-13-2011
  »  New  The tales of two phonostages: Allnic and 834PT...  The tales of two phonostages: Allnic and 834PT....  Analog Playback Forum     0  14777  12-21-2011
03-27-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 226
Joined on 01-15-2009

Post #: 261
Post ID: 19153
Reply to: 19150
Parts Ag
fiogf49gjkf0d
here:

http://www.partsconnexion.com/connectors_rca_goertz.html


Kind Regards
Stitch
03-27-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 454
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #: 262
Post ID: 19155
Reply to: 19153
Trabant done in pure silver
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Stitch wrote:
here:

http://www.partsconnexion.com/connectors_rca_goertz.html


Thanks Stitch. I cann't speak of sonics but visualy it looks like in the title--a classical high mass
RCA design from the 40's (or 30's ?)...only done in silver and at a audiophile price.
At this price WBT looks (how it sounds no idea) much better, at least for the phono application due to the low mass: the signal
does not experience such a drastic jump in the conductor cross-section from a very low guage tonearm wire to a massive RCA scheisse.
For the plug,  Eichmann Bullet looks most attractive from a design point of view. 



Cheers,
Jarek
03-27-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,163
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 263
Post ID: 19156
Reply to: 19150
Too Soft and Brittle?
fiogf49gjkf0d
N-set, I have not tried the AN connectors.  And I think the cited "metalurgical problems" relate to ease and speed (and so, cost...) of immediately available, outsourced manufacturing rather than use of the metals.

FWIW, the WBT Next-Gen Ag connectors facilitate "the silver thing" when I've used them with silver wire, and they do not "swamp" the multi-metal IC like Cu connectors I have tried.  The biggest problems I've had with silver coated copper are "discontinuous" sound (and soundfield), and unstable/ever-changing sound over time.  YMMV.  Again, I have received "feedback" telling me (among othe things...) that I used the "wrong" silver plated stuff (including an early iteration of the vaunted Valhalla).

Do remember that I regard all this stuff as "seasoning", once a certain "minimum" is achieved, and I personally want a certain fairly "literal" sound.  I also happen to like the idea of "low mass" connectors, and I am not afraid of copper connectors, per se.  However, "pure" copper connectors are also uncommon, and I have been given to understand that this is for the same "metalurgical reasons" that "they" avoid pure silver.  Not to mention that pure silver costs enough to "warrant" plating and other ways to cut back on the...   silver.

Is it cheaper/more profitable to make up a story than to pony up for $$$$ "uncommon" materials and "proprietary" manufacturing?  Or are the audio "manufacturers"  actually telling the Whole Truth for a change?  You pay your money, and you take your chance.

Meanwhile: If you are going to use a SUT, this actually is a Big Deal that will profoundly affect the Sound you get from your system, regardless of which connectors or solder you use.  I recommend you integrate the SUT (with its broken-in cartridge) before you spend a ton on connectors.


Best regards,
Paul S
03-27-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 454
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #: 264
Post ID: 19157
Reply to: 19156
Silver swamp
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Paul S wrote:


Meanwhile: If you are going to use a SUT, this actually is a Big Deal that will profoundly affect the Sound you get from your system, regardless of which connectors or solder you use.  I recommend you integrate the SUT (with its broken-in cartridge) before you spend a ton on connectors.


Thanks Paul, yes I'll use SUT of course. The candidates (in the order of intellectual preference): convincing Tribute Pieter to wind in silver, LL1941Ag, silvercore mc25Ag. And no, I'm not gonna spend a ton on the village connectors. Actually the more I dive in the "DIY RCA swamp", the more I'm inclided to really try a continuous tonearm cable run from the cart to the phono input with a DIY cable from the tonearm base on (Teflon tubing, PTFE foam, heavy Cu braid, I think I could even bias PTFE foam like Audioquest) and a Ag/teflon symmetric connector of my choice.



Cheers,
Jarek
03-27-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,163
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 265
Post ID: 19158
Reply to: 19157
In the Long Run
fiogf49gjkf0d

It would be nice to run a solid line from the cartridge to the SUT.  I do this, but I do use connectors at the SUT; not because I think it's electrically "optimal" but because I don't want to crack the case on the unobtanium T3000, let alone glop solder in there.  If you do try for a total hard wire, remember to (somehow...)shield the inputs and outputs.  No wire, connector, or solder choice will trump parasitic noise from the SUT.  As for shielding, good luck with that, too.  I hate to say it, but un-shielded cable consistently "sounds better" than shielded --- apart from the noise, of course.  Somehow, I (seem to) get away with unshielded tonearm wire running from the cartridge to the SUT, which sits very near to the TT.  Of course the arm and TT motor are well grounded to a dedicated Cu rod, and other electrics are well away from the SUT.

Best regards,
Paul S

04-01-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 454
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #: 266
Post ID: 19169
Reply to: 19158
2RM?
fiogf49gjkf0d
I'm wondering if anyone used the industrial standard 2RM-type of connectors for a DIY Lo MC phono connection?

http://www.trimmer.ru/?target=61&nom=20251

The smallest is 2RM14 with 4 pins, 1mm dia so pretty low mass--no big diameter jump along the phono signal.
Pins are silver-over brass but what the fuck, it's only 1mm dia x 10mm in total of an interuption.now compare that to
a classical high mass RCA link...


 Paul S wrote:
As for shielding, good luck with that, too.  I hate to say it, but un-shielded cable consistently "sounds better" than shielded --- apart from the noise, of course. 


THis is probably due to capacitive coupling shield-signal wire. What I have in mind is to use a PTFE foam tape to get some distance between
the wire and the shielding braid:

http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/ptfe-tapes/3149350/

Anyone any experience with it in DIY cables?

Cheers,
N-set

PS Even smaller type of connectors PC:

http://www.techcomplect.spb.ru/connctr4.html



Cheers,
Jarek
04-01-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,163
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 267
Post ID: 19170
Reply to: 19169
Where's the Effing Cable Thread When We Need It?
fiogf49gjkf0d
N-set, before you wrap the signal wires with PTFE tape, I should mention that I have had some PTFE "tubing" on hand for quite a while, for "tubular" shield spacing, if I ever actually do it.  I should also point out that most decent shielded IC has some sort of spacing between the shield and signal wires.  The sonic fog added by shielding might be from "capacitive coupling", but I am stuck with shielded IC for the run from the SUT to the phono; otherwise, noise is BAD.  I can't remember right now if I got the PTFE tubing from Michael Percy or Chris Van Haus (VH Audio) but it is available, along with braided, tinned CU "tubing" for shields, and braided this and that tubing for outer sleeves.

Never tried the weird little connectors, but brass is a shitty conductor.

God, this sounds like the very worst sort of DIY threads!  FYI, I HATE DIY!

Best regards,
Paul S
04-02-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 454
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #: 268
Post ID: 19171
Reply to: 19170
DIY
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Paul S wrote:
God, this sounds like the very worst sort of DIY threads!  FYI, I HATE DIY!


It sounds but it does not necessarily mean that it is Smile Let me try to deffend a bit my last postings:
DIY is a self propelled random walk "let's try this, let's try that, let's make something cool". Here
the goal is clear: try to work out a good soultion for  phono connection. RCA, IMHO,
just looking at its construction suits phono needs as brilliantly as sand paper cleaning ass.
If subtituting it  will give a sonic benefit
or will be a missed effort, only the experiment can show. But this experiment in my view must be somehow
planned, exactly not to make it "DIY style". Now, getting rid of RCA in phono is possible only within
self-made constructions obviously, so as a consequence the phono cable must be also self made, esp.
that it gives me a chance to avoid one connection at the arm base.

Comming back to the merit if I'm still allowed: I'm planning to try PC4TB russian connectors:

http://connector.su/parts/305/pc4tb_rozetka-1823.html

Brass or bronze is what it is but
95% of boutique $$$$ RCA'a are brass anyway...and here the mass of the connector is a fart comapring to
the RCA--there is no bulk brass chunk in the signal's way but a gentle 1mmx10mm needle.
Now for the cable, yes Paul, I'm planning to use the Percy Teflon tubing for the immediate shell,
but this will not give enough distance to the shield. Hence the idea to wrap the Percy tubing with the PTFE tape
and apply the shield on top of it. This should give ~5mm distance wire-shield...or 10mm if I double wrap.

Cheers,
N-set



Cheers,
Jarek
04-02-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,163
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 269
Post ID: 19172
Reply to: 19171
95%?
fiogf49gjkf0d
But why would you consider brass connectors because of 95% of boutique RCA if the idea is to wind up with the best signal path?

Probably, you will not use continuous wire from the cartridge coil, and you will probably not solder but use some sort of clip to transition from cartridge pins to the arm wire.  I suppose we are stuck with brass cartridge pins, but make the inevitable connectors you have control over to be good conductors.  I wish someone would make really good cartridge clips!  I use Cardas (I think); but I am hardly "sold" on them!  Hell, they might be brass! But other, "folded" clips used to loosen and sound "sooty" over time!  So I guess ease of use and consistency trump possibly better sound!

Since shielding seems like a bad idea for arm wire, how far can you go from the cartridge with no shield or connector?  Where is the SUT in relation to the cartridge?  Where is the SUT in relation to the RIAA, etc?  At what point do you transition to shielded cable, and how does this happen?  Will the better conduction and "surround shielding" of "premium", low-mass RCA connectors trump the still lower mass of tiny brass connectors?  I do know people who use only cheap old Radio Shack RCA connectors because they have the least mass.  But I should also add that there is nothing remarkable about the sound of their systems that makes me especially curious to go this route, myself.  I can say that I am very un-cautious about all of this stuff during "development" of drivers and X/Os, for instance; I do regard it as "fine tiuning".

The fatter, stiffer and heavier you make that shielded cable, the more of a hassle it will be to deal with...

As for the thicker PTFE/wider spacing between conductors and shielding, perhaps Bud P is reading along, will share some thoughts?


Best regards,
Paul S
04-02-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 454
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #: 270
Post ID: 19173
Reply to: 19172
More on that
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Paul S wrote:
But why would you consider brass connectors because of 95% of boutique RCA if the idea is to wind up with the best signal path?


Of course not because of that! The ideal would be the connector I've shown but made with pure silver/teflon,
but to my knowledge nothing like that exists (I've checked Lemo, Camac, etc).
I vaguely remember reading few years ago somewhere that Russians had connectors of the bayonet type with solid
silver pins, use in their SS rockets, but all my attempts to verify that failed.
I would tolerate brass and/or bronze (the female part of the shown russian connector is silver-over-phosphor bronze)
in the shown connector geometry due to it's relatively low volume compared to the boutique RCA's.

 Paul S wrote:
Since shielding seems like a bad idea for arm wire, how far can you go from the cartridge with no shield or connector?  Where is the SUT in relation to the cartridge?  Where is the SUT in relation to the RIAA, etc? 


I have not tried the unshielded wire in my current location nor I have a chance to do it right now.
SUT is in the same box as the RIAA, about 1m from the cart.

 Paul S wrote:
At what point do you transition to shielded cable, and how does this happen?


Current situation:
EMT arm: DIY double shielded cable, shield starts at the tonearm base and goes all the length of the cable. Both shields are
connected to the RIAA housing.
3012R: some stock SME shielded cable plugged to the arm RCA base, shield grounded at the RIAA side.

Planned on 3012R: a continous run from the cart socket in the armwand to the entrance of the RIAA/SUT, terminated with some quality connection.
I want the flexibility of detaching the arm from the RIAA/SUT so no, I will not solder the wire directly to the SUT.

 Paul S wrote:
Will the better conduction and "surround shielding" of "premium", low-mass RCA connectors trump the still lower mass of tiny brass connectors?


This is something I'd love to know, Paul! In other words what is less sonically obstructive:a superb material but in a shitty geometry or a shitty material but in a right geometry? Let me invoke this skin effect, which I hve no idea how it affects the sonics, but physically the current density decreases
by the relative ratio of the depth to a characteristic, freq. dependent skin depth delta(f). So the thinner the conductor, keeping the Ag plating thickness the same, the smaller the absolute volume of the shitty material the signal will travel through...how it affects sonics no idea.
I'm trying to locate the connectors I've mentioned from the old miliitary USSR stock, hoping they used a thicker silve plating the modern Chinese analogs do...or perhaps I could extract the pins and Ag plate them the 2nd time.


Cheers,
N-set





Cheers,
Jarek
04-02-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,163
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 271
Post ID: 19174
Reply to: 19173
"Partly Unshielded" Arm Wire
fiogf49gjkf0d
Is there such a thing as partly unshielded arm wire?  If you want that run shielded, don't you have to start at the cartridge connection? 

Just asking...

Best regards,
Paul S
04-02-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 454
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #: 272
Post ID: 19175
Reply to: 19174
Fully shielded
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Paul S wrote:
Is there such a thing as partly unshielded arm wire?  If you want that run shielded, don't you have to start at the cartridge connection?


Paul, the tonearm wire runs inside the metal armwands (EMT & SME),
which in turn are star grounded to the RIAA box together with the phono cable shields.
No audible ham problems with that currently (although my spectrum anal peaks some 50Hz)



Cheers,
Jarek
04-02-2013 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 454
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #: 273
Post ID: 19178
Reply to: 19171
Interesting
fiogf49gjkf0d
A bit of search and it turns out that VPI and Simon York use something more sophisticated
than RCA on their tonearms: they use Lemo connectors...and immediately fuck everything up
by connecting it to their "RCA connection box", right next to the arm
Hahaha!!! Make a manicure and then cut the hand.
This raises the question: is the use of sophisticated
connector (Lemo) a pure marketing move for the arm to look more advanced and hi-tek than with
the trabant 30's RCA? Or there is there some sonic advantage if the phono accepts Lemo
(some small manufacturers seem to take the chance, e.g. http://www.mr-labs.com/facts.htm)
and they have to use RCA box because of it's idiotic hegemony?

Checking the Lemo metallurgy nothing fancy: standard beryllium bronze female - brass male, both with Cu-Ni-Au standard plating
(Russian is Ag over the same metalls) + some PEEK insulator (not as good as Teflon but much better than Russian bakelite).








Cheers,
Jarek
06-15-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,547
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 274
Post ID: 21707
Reply to: 5856
End of Life Phonostage… is breeding.
fiogf49gjkf0d

It is kind of nice to see that someone have embraced the idea of “End of Life Phonostage”. A gentlemen from I presume Asia have assembled the 834PT-AIR and it look like he likes it.

http://mellowgroovy.blogspot.com/2015/06/monday-modify-end-of-life-phonostage.html 
 
I need to admit that I think 4-5 years back Tim de Paravicin contacted me and accused me that I not only stolen his design in my  “End of Life Phonostage“ but that I insisted that I was the designer of 834P. That is kind of ridicules as I always mentioned Tim everywhere with quite high degree of respect and under no circumstance I have interest to promote myself as I am a “designer” of anything. 
 
http://www.goodsoundclub.com/EndOfLifePhonostage.aspx 
 
Mr. Paravicin kind of kept blame me and I was forced to suggest him get life, to go look a world and never return. It is very said as I had zero atomicity and quite high respect to Tim before. 
    Anyhow, thankfully the good ideas live longer and happily then stupid egos… 
 
Rgs, Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
06-15-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
steverino
Posts 302
Joined on 05-23-2009

Post #: 275
Post ID: 21708
Reply to: 21707
Creative people
fiogf49gjkf0d
Creative people often have inner demons and strange beliefs. I am one of the few exceptions to that according to myself. I will be careful never to praise another Baron Tim product to avoid confusing him that I am engaging in intellectual theft. Yes I used to like the 834P phonostage but now I know better.
06-15-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
rogier
Posts 12
Joined on 11-16-2006

Post #: 276
Post ID: 21709
Reply to: 21707
Copyright air-cap RIAA...
fiogf49gjkf0d
hopefully building an air-cap phonostage doesn't get prohibited.., i 've built one too, this time with a different tube and values but the same principle (in Miller-capacity)

With kind regards, rogier
06-16-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,547
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 277
Post ID: 21710
Reply to: 21707
It is what it is.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Well, below is the email that I got from the man. I feel that he is diagnosable. I am not the Doctor House but I have been insisting for years that any person who spent proficiently in Audio Industry some time is fully diagnosable. 
 
On Thursday, August 29, 2013, EARYOSHINO wrote:
Sir, it has been brought to my attention your pontification articles hijacking and trying to profess that the EAR834P was a "SkinFlint" your quotes design. I suggest that if one had put all these fancy components in, would the public pay say £7K for a unit?  It also appalled me some of the ignorence about capacitors. Mica have lots of problems that is why I use polystyrene. I did a lot of work on capacitors in the early 70's in Japan to substantiate my choice of components. I have seen a variation of your so called mods on a Chinese product. Wonderful. I call it intellectual deprivation. You also made mention of my transformers by Stevens & Billington. To suggest you can buy them out the back door? They were and still are my propriotry designs that the information on how to make and wind were taught to him. He has had 25 years of exclusive knowledge from me. Your objectives please tell me? Make money of my back?
 



"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
06-16-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,163
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 278
Post ID: 21711
Reply to: 21710
I Guess We Just Don't Understand Economics
fiogf49gjkf0d
Not long ago I made an online remrark about a deluxe/"flexible" phonostage, opining that I would rather have mm-only gain and fixed input R, since I use a SUT, and I don't want the extra circuitry idling in the background. The manufacturer responded privately, very politely, saying, yes, that would be optimal, but they need to sell the phono stages. Since this is a manufacturer that sells "directly", I guess the "economic issues" brought up by TdP are pretty much "universal" for manufacturers.


Paul S
06-16-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
steverino
Posts 302
Joined on 05-23-2009

Post #: 279
Post ID: 21712
Reply to: 21710
Gray market
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy,

It is possible that he is concerned about people in the big Asian country near Japan taking these various ideas and producing knockoffs or even worse upgrades to his basic design. It is revealing that he says "intellectual deprivation" rather than some more legalistic term. Also it is revealing that he references the early 70s for his study of capacitors. He seems to be admitting he has not done any recent work.

Here is a short quote from a Stereophile interview with Tim deP:

De Paravicini: Initially, at about the age of 13, I started constructing them from articles in the hobbyist magazines. Since I couldn't afford to buy all the parts I needed, they had to be stripped from old radios and televisions from scrap yards. My frustration at the performance of those construction projects forced me to look at their design. I ended up having to try and be innovative, starting from square one to come up with my own improved design.

Well what goes around comes around. But I can understand if he fears someone trying to directly profit from a knockoff. It doesn't seem that he is accusing you of that; merely making ideas about improvements more widely known.
06-17-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Wojtek
Pinckney (MI), United States
Posts 159
Joined on 09-01-2005

Post #: 280
Post ID: 21715
Reply to: 21712
Mix up
fiogf49gjkf0d
I guess Thorsten is laughing since he should be the main receiver of TdP email. Popularity of a product is a double bladed sword.  I do hope that sales of EAR 834 phono stage increased notably after Romy decided to make that circuit into his "end of life phonostage". I read many references regarding that unit on second hand market and it's qualities pointing to  lengthy saga on GoodSoundClub and Thorsten's musings.I also bought my used 834P on the promise that " 99% of analog users don't really need a better phonostage than EAR" and I sort of agree. Surely, I did make my own version with fancy caps and parts but looking from a perspective I consider that effort a waste of time and money. Stock circuit is "good enough for who it is for" although better not to look what's inside .I don't think the whole basic unit has more than $25 worth of wholesale material cost including the case and this may partially explain Tim's outburst. There may be a market pressures to increase the quality of components caused by multiple modification threads on internet. It kind of forces him to increase quality while he can't rise the price due to spread of phonostages  available now a days Tough choices for UK based manufacturer.
Page 14 of 15 (285 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 11 12 13 14 15 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Where are our good phonostages?..  Omnigon Tubes...  Analog Playback Forum     61  444042  05-31-2004
  »  New  The Expressive Technologies SU-1..  “too bright” or “resolution” or “details” with SUT prim...  Analog Playback Forum     33  266333  12-30-2004
  »  New  EAR 834P Modification Guide..  Copper air caps...  Analog Playback Forum     38  424345  02-09-2006
  »  New  My Analog Playback: the fat lady has sung..  My analog setup update....  Analog Playback Forum     9  84627  04-04-2006
  »  New  Phono stages with SU-1..  SU-1...  Analog Playback Forum     4  46408  11-23-2007
  »  New  Chasing utopian better phono interconnect...  Did I miss something?...  Analog Playback Forum     6  79566  06-05-2008
  »  New  Buying a last cartridge...  Lucky you...  Analog Playback Forum     80  570376  09-05-2008
  »  New  EAR 834P mods..  Copper air caps...  Analog Playback Forum     38  424345  11-04-2008
  »  New  AMR PH-77: just another phonostage or more?..  Oh, yeah... the sound of the Thing Itself......  Analog Playback Forum     11  87766  07-05-2009
  »  New  An interesting Russian pnonocorrector...  Uber-tweeky phono topologies deconstructed...  Analog Playback Forum     9  57600  03-01-2010
  »  New  Expressive Technologies SU-1 and cartridge output and i..  MV and Ohms...  Analog Playback Forum     2  20581  07-07-2011
  »  New  How to run MM-type cartridge into MC phonostage?..  Quite interesting....  Analog Playback Forum     6  39760  11-13-2011
  »  New  The tales of two phonostages: Allnic and 834PT...  The tales of two phonostages: Allnic and 834PT....  Analog Playback Forum     0  14777  12-21-2011
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts