deemon wrote:

Brian , I never tried SSG cap in phonostage . SSG has a good reputation ..... but I'd prefer teflon for coupling . Mica caps , even good ones like SSG , seems too "bright" for me , but teflon sound pretty neutral .

Brian Clark wrote:

Whereas I do. deParavicini's worked on designs in Japan over several years and became familiar with the  research going on there in the Seventies which culminated in identifying the HD decay-spectrum as a key indicator for "musicality". I.e. a monotonically decreasing level as order increased such that each HD  component masked the following component. This occurs naturally in a single triode operating under normal conditions. When I simulated the 834P circuit two things were obvious - the level of THD was high but the aforesaid decay spectrum approximated that of a single triode valve. For what it's worth and acknowledging it is part of a bigger picture of course.

I am going tell you, Brian, and to other something ease that might blow your socks off, if you are associated or talk with Paravicini then feel free to forward this message to him. So, what would it be?

Well, the “musicality” and “humanity” of this Paravicini-based phonocorrector (whatever reasons are) turned out to be so astonishing that it becomes dazzling. Do you know that my new 834PTF phonocorrector has an ability to actually override the musicality of amusical medioum and to recover/recuperate the poisoned Sound? Do I sound too hallucinogenic, do I? The reality is that I am not hallucinogenic and that I very clearly, cognitively and rationally see the things. Let me to explain.

First of all what I’m saying does not mean to convince anybody. It is internet, my site, and I can run my month on any subject with any degree of credibility and trustworthiness. However, I do not think I was ever was spotted lying or to be deceptive (I can testify that I was stupid in some occasions but it was not deliberate and was just due to ignorance). So, I’m not lying now – the “End of Life Phonostage” does have some internal magic that makes Sound passing via the phonocorrector more interesting in comparing to (are you ready for this?)… the sound that did not pass via the phonocorrector. OK, now I shell make a long Mahler’s after-Allegro-Maestoso pose…

One of the many reasons why I do not write audio-reviews because the task to convince the Moronic audio public is too simple. In my personal audio life I need to convince myself – a way much more complicated and much difficult task. If you read my post “Reviewing preamps by imbeciles”:

http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=2589

Then you understand my attitude toward to the way how I see preamps. OK, why a phonocorrector shell be different? I use the same demands to RIAA corrector as I have to preamp. So, for a few years I practice the to run the inverted RIAA curve to phonostage and evaluate how the anti-RIAA-phonocorrector tandem competes with sound to the original source that I use to feed the anti-RIAA network. There is always a very specific differences but if you trained to do it and well understand the permanent limitations of your anti-RIAA network then you can say a LOT about the sound of a tested phonocorrector.

So, since end up the “End of Life Phonostage” I spent some time to listen it after the anti-RIAA. I always burn in phonostage with anti-RIAA sound as feeding phonostage with straight 3mV not RIAA sound obliterate lower basses for next 3-4 days. So, I am running the following chain:

88/24 files from DAW - Linx16 - Lavry 924 – Placette Active – Melquiades – Macondo (with Dominus Rev B everywhere)

Against the following chain:

88/24 files from DAW - Linx16 - Lavry 924 – Hagerman’s iRIAA (600R in -60dB out) - End of Life Phonostage - Placette Active – Melquiades – Macondo (with Dominus Rev B everywhere but using Proteus between Lavry and Hagerman’s filter)

What do you think the difference in sound is? There are some very minute issuers here and there - it would be hard to comment about them to readers who not tuned to those evaluations BUT the shocking reality is that I generally prefer in term of “musicality” and “humanity” the sound that actually passes through the End of Life Phonostage. It acts as “harmonic’ catalyzer” – very pleasant effect indeed. Perhaps it injects some fat second harmonics into sound but it does NOT sound like ONLY that. I do not know what it does but the effect is there and it is very very very very positive. I would also say that the air-caped 834PTF is insultingly transparent in this test. I can only assure that 100% of people out there would listen that sound coming via the anti-RIAA-phonocorrector tandem with no clue that they were listening the RIAA double-inverted sound. So, whoever Paravicini did with his “HD decay-spectrum as a key indicator" looks like works…

Rgs, Romy the happy Cat

My first thought is that anything a component adds or subtracts, it adds or subtracts similarly to/from everything, like putting the same amount of pepper on all food or salting and watering down all soup to taste +/- the same.

But of course you would not stay happy if this were the case...

So, what is it?

Are we talking about the sort of "re-constituting" and noise dampening that the step-up transformer does, or is this some other form of addition/subtraction that turns insipid, poorly-recorded rock and roll records into angelic soul singing?

Most important, how does it do with a variety of LPs?

I think there is a critical difference between making the best of musical content and simply making music.

I have to admit that although I always long for the latter, I am wary, weary and suspicious even of the notion, so I always wind up with my best version of the former.

Best regards,
Paul S

Perhaps if you build another phono corrector you could play your TT through that, then through the inverse RIAA then through the EoL corrector then the linestage & power amps etc.

Will you be listening to all of your line level sources via the inverse RIAA and EoL corrector from now on?

deemon wrote:

Do you mean a battery bias , Brian ? We didn't try it because of 1 V bias voltage - I don't know if the battery with this voltage does exist . I know only 1,5 V and 1,2 V cells ...... maybe using some chemical reactions we can obtain 1 V or little less , but I don't know how to do it ..... Anyhow , if we use a battery in the grid chain - we still need a resistor ( 2 M ) after the coupling capacitor , and we must add 2 contacts of the battery socket and the battery itself . But the fixed bias , as I think , is a more suitable solution in this case - we have the most simply sound chain from the plate of V1 to the grid of V2 , and the short grounded cathode of V2 . I think that it's the best idea ... Dima

Will I be listening to all my sources via the inverse RIAA?

Well, the question was sarcastic but it has some rational grains.  If the signal passing via the 834PTF-Air does receive some positive attributes despite of the presumed nastiness of the dual-RIAA filtering then can we found some lessons in this fact?

In fact the lesson is not such a major discovery as I would like to convince myself.  Passing the signal via the “starving” 834PTF-Air turned out to be very educational but I head the same effect from other electronics. The Lamm L1 has remarkably similar effect but the Lamm L1 X factor also included the geometrical poisoning of imagine in a very unique way. The 834PTF-Air does not do it. I have now at home one 16-bit DAC that it trying to compete with my Bidat (it is an evolution for a company and I would like to keep the name private). The contested DAC is better then Bidat …but… the Bidat does have that “it”, that second harmonic dirt, that sets all bets off, making sound much more acoustic-like.

So, what the positive deference between the straight run from my a sources and the signal passing via the 834PTF-Air? I bought yesterday the 2007 Live recording of London Symphony with Gergiev conducting Mahler Sixth. An interesting performance, not perfect but very interesting. What could be more full-range then this! For a save of musically I would go for New Philharmonia with my beloved Barbirolli  -  he owns the M6 and this recording is the only M6 that I might listen for pleasure. For sake of lower levels of pleasure the Gergiev would do… Anyhow, I was experimenting with it running the 834PTF-Air in and out of the loop and it is VERY interesting….  I can get the “interesting” difference only via the immediately switching via the Placette’s remote control using the short-term memory. The difference within long- term memory in very complicated subject with this particular case (there are reasons). So, switching from the 834PTF-Air engaged to direct feed wants make you to vomit. I am not kidding! The sound feels like you Earth suddenly lost effect of gravitate and everything collapses. I make a pose,  listen a direct feed and then turn on the feed with anti-RIAA and 834PTF-Air in the signal path. The sound becomes VERY unpleasant very large but fat, chubby and imbalanced. The domination of the second harms oink is practically unbearable for the short-term memory. However, then mind, not actually not mind but senses and feelings begin to recognize an interesting save net – the sound got suddenly attached by with second harmonics but   at the same time got more dynamic (here is where ET2 does its amassing duty). So that enormous size of sound and it’s ability to flow slaw like a value river (slow is big plus in my book) but at the same time compensated with larger dynamics and ability to accelerate across range more rapidly and more “intelligent” make awareness very fast get use to this new Sound and to embarrass it very-very quick. Literally after 10 seconds I experience no discomfort. I do admit that there is some “coloration of harmonic saturation” but I did not detect so far that this coloration interferes with my listing experiences; I might recognize it later on….

Well, concluding, the saga with the ET2+ 834PTF-Air or as I call it the “End of Life" Phonostage turned out to be very educational. I would certainly do not support and would not advocate the idea of “Injection Channel” on the level of electronics  but  those observations of my make me to this about a lot of things. Why not to introduce the necessary but very defined “Injection” by the driver stage of the DSET for instance where it would be possible to introduce  a warmth of a given charnel by using the idea similar to 834P? It would problem imposable in 2-stage power design. There are many other applications…

Allo gents,
not sure if you've seen this:
http://www.pmillett.com/etf_sod.htm
http://www.pmillett.com/file_downloads/ThesoundofDistortion.pdf

Pete devised a circuit whose distortion order and level could be controlled. It was for educational purposes but might find application in - to quote JC Morrison - a hedonistic preamp.
cheers
cv

Last night electricity was surprisingly OK, despite of the current heat wave and that everyone runs air-conditioning and I found myself listing deep into high. It was mostly LP and I came to a few interesting observations regarding the sound of my air-cap armed phonocorrector. The corrector has now it’s good tubes, closed up and as now it is in the state how it will be permanently.

I looks to me that corrector has own signature but not the signature that simile to any other correctors I have heard. The uniqueness that I would like to comment on this corrector is its ability go up in dynamic range of high frequency without introduction of… anything beside just a higher dynamic range of high frequency. The corrector gains volume in upper mid range with stunning cleanness. In my view it is unknown and not anticipated in audio as rise of HF volume is always associated with rise of some artifacts. The air-cap armed corrector does not do it, does not do it at all. While the air-cap filter has orders of magnitude more sophisticated and unsoiled ability to run across HF ranges it also open up unheard ability for discrimination of upper MF and HF differences. The idiosyncrasies of the “string bite” in each section, each orchestra, each style of playing manner and…. each pressing or each stamp batch became more highlighted, more insistently distincting one from other. Still, it is doe not by differentiating the artifacts patterns and most of audio does but somehow different, I do not know how to describe it at this point  – it shell be heard. You see, the air-cap has no “resolution”. It delivers very distinctive HF but no “resolution”. I always told that “resolution” was invented by Morons who would like to catalog the playback artifacts – the air-cap filter can afford to do “no resolution” type of sound.

Still, I feel that air-cap has own coloration. This “no resolution”, vacuum-clean HF dynamic is coloration itself as I do recognize this characteristic across all music that the corrector plays. The sound of the air-corrector has own signature- the “signature of tempted virtue” – this behavior does not exist during my experience of live musical events. I think I need some time to reflect and to think about what I hear from this corrector.

I do not particularly like Asian women. A few of them that I dated annoyed me tremendously with their overly zealous desire to compliment and please me. I am, as any other person, do not mind to be praised but I would like to get as a reimbursement for some kind accomplishes of mine that I personally values. To be admired by those Asian girls just because I was a current man in their live made me very fell boring and I always voluntary escape from the glorifications of the Asian women right into the hands of our Western bitching and demanding females. So far the air-cap filter in my phonocorrector acts in the way like an Asian woman those overly enthusiastic do essentially very positive things. Perhaps I ask too much or perhaps this effect will moderate itself with time but so far it is what it is.

Romy the Cat wrote:

Still, I feel that air-cap has own coloration. This “no resolution”, vacuum-clean HF dynamic is coloration itself as I do recognize this characteristic across all music that the corrector plays. The sound of the air-corrector has own signature- the “signature of tempted venture” – this behavior does not exist during my experience of live musical events. I think I need some time to reflect and to think about what I hear from this corrector.

Usually any piece of audio with which I dealt had own sonic set signatures. It is not necessarily bad thing. It like an accents in language – in many instances accents modify the meaning of said, however if the subject exposed at crucial level of depth then the presence and the value of accents become irrelevant. The same is with the sonic signatures of audio elements – the all screw up the sounds but if they hold the basic integrity of Sound then those signatures are out of attention. As I said the “End of Life Phonocorrector” has own signatures at “the sounds” level and I might not even convinced that they are so transparent from a perspective of Sound. However here is exceptionally interesting thing - the signatures are not static as in any other audio element I head but they shift from record to record.

Playing some records that I know very well for years and that I played in different settings I might identify the very fine specifics that I feel are not the part of this specific recording/pressing but rather a sonic contribution of my playback, a phonocorrector in given case. However, with another record the characteristic sonic injection from this phonocorrector changes. The phonocorrector truly prostitute itself, subduing own integrity and somehow reacting to the demands of the requestor. It is VERY interesting and in much unexpected behavior. I truly cannot get grip for it as now and I need to think about it more…

No, VTA is not in and of itself a characteristic of Sound; but in my own system the stylus' vertical tracking/rake angle is not something that results inthe same sound no matter where I put it.  In fact, even small changes profoundly affect the character of the sound that the phonostage is expected to "make the most of".  And in my system, record thickness and original cutting angle are both - apparently - factors to be reckoned with in terms of setting VTA, which, in turn, audibly affects the character of the sound, in a "pattern" similar to what you have described earlier.

Sure, it's a nuisance; but this does not make it go away.  And at the same time it is something I am able to dial to very beneficial effect.

Best regards,
Paul S

Romy the Cat wrote:

OK, here are some follow up thoughts after the completion of the project. I am sure I will burn it for a month or so. I think everything will be fine, I do not expect any issuers technical or sonic. The way how the entrance to the corrector done it is very easy to replace the 4 cable from 4 arms without replacing the cables. As I told I did found a very interesting “second phonostage” (very convent one) that I was planning to use with my other arms but if it is so convent to flip the cable I wonder if I go for the second phonostage. I still have my former 834PT and the 7788-7721 phonostage available, all performing perfectly fine … later on I will decide if I willing to use them. There is one area that I would like to explore with my “End of Life" Phonostage after it will settle down. The very smart fist stage in there will be stay as is, also I have no interest to experiment with second stage. The last stage is just a cathode follower. In my ultimate buffer experiment I never was able to get a good transparency from tube buffers, so I am intending to put there (as an experiment) a transistor instead the last 12AX7. I am not planning to change anything but juts to take a male 9-pin tube socket, solder in there a transistor that is able to care 300V and juts plug it and play. It is possible that with SS output buffer I might get different result. What kind result I would like to get? Sonically I can’t at this point to identify what I would like to get but measurements –wise I would like to drive the low range to sub 8Hz at 0dB. It is not that my hands are itching but I feel that at line level SS buffer shell do better than a tube…. If someone know any good sounding low power (5-15mA) transistor at 300V-350V then please let me know. So far I was proposed MPSA42, ZTX458 and suitable but too powerful MJE340. As a reader of my site suggested: “The NPN will reduce the output impedance => will affect the Riaa feedback increasing the gain by ~1db@20Hz and ~0.5db@50Hz(in your setup will be quite noticeable). A quick and dirty remedy is to add a resistor (1k5-1k8) in series with the emitter of the NPN. Although this could be useful to reveal the sonic properties of the NPN it may also defeat the trouble” I still consider the options how to make the experiment with buffers substation clean and methodologically kosher. Sine I have absolutely no knowledge at SS any recommendation are welcome via the site or direct emails.

The guys who red my site advised me in selection of a SS devise that would do no changes to sircut of any kind and would be just drop-in replacement. I bought MPSA42:

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/PDF/MPSA42.pdf

 and plugged them in. The result was surprising to me.

I lost all bass, the bass in amplitude (a lot) and in quality - the bass become very shallow and unpleasantly fast.  Also, in a very minor degree the very HF become too… SS-like. Surprise? Anyoe I hate the result and I put the tube back, I will not try it on my “End of Life" Phonostage