Site Links
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
In this Discussion
Who's Online (4)
- charlielaub 3:53PM
- Eggguy 3:53PM
- rjj45 3:53PM
- Tom_S 3:53PM
Please review the site Rules, Terms of Service, and Privacy Policy at your convenience. Rules, TOS, Privacy
Get familiar with the reaction system: Introducing the Reaction System
Phono upgrade.
Would value this forums input as well.
Thanks guys.
Comments
Have a look over at diyaudio, you can probably build something decent for your $200 budget. I built a pearl II, and it is a solid unit, but it's over budget.
I like my Bellari VP549. I listen to a lot of vinyl and have no plans to replace it, it sounds really good. It looks nice too, sitting next to to my table. My only complaint is that ridiculous blue LED.
I just have a cheap UTurn Pluto.
Just a thought, but upgrading your cartridge may give you a bigger bang for your buck.
IIRC, there was a letter exchange a few years ago on AudioXpert, something like "Due to my complete mastery of electronics, I have developed a wonderful phone pre". The editors responded with something like "Did you stay awake in class? You have made 3 serious errors in your implementation".
Love to see real expertise.....
Went from an Audio Technica something or another to an Ortofon super om20 ... big difference everywhere. Even after running vinyl through the washer, it would still sound dirty with the AT, somehow, for the most part, the Ortofon made the dirt disappear. Big plus as 99% of my vinyl is flea market finds.
We have an old Technics SL-23 direct drive turntable. Changing the cartridge from an Audio-Technica to a high output moving coil Ortofon (cost about A$180, 25 years ago) worked wonders.
Not as much gain/sound output as the MM, so you have to turn up the receiver volume a bit, but great sound.
Geoff
I have the original Wayne Colburn designed Pearl phono stage. The PCB boards and semiconductors were roughly half the cost of the current Pearl II boards and semiconductors, but it is no longer available. The original Pearl has less gain, so it can only be used with MM cartidges.
The Pearl II is adjustable for gain, but I have a Hana SL, so I need the high gain. All in it was about $500-$600 to build. Not bad for what it is. There are other preamps on diyaudio from Salas, XRK, and others that know their shit.
Don't take this the wrong way, but why have ASR measure a phono preamp? They are full on "the better it measures the better it sounds. So a turntable is inherently inferior to a cd and by ASR logic why even listen to it. Buy something that says Topping on it, they will love you. No negativity aimed at you, just curious.
We measure our speakers why not measure our gear?
Like speakers there is more than measurements, but measurements lead to understanding.
Amir has plenty of moments like "huh, measures worse than it sounds" moments. Inconsistent. Grain of salt and all that. People take him pretty seriously, like Zaph back in the day.
I have noticed some glaring errors in his thinking too...
InDIYana Event Website
I think that is a problem for a lot of tech people, they get taken seriously because they generate the data. Data in nature is pretty black and white but the listening is not. I think you could make an argument that some people take Amir more seriously than he takes himself.
I think that people who can objectively listen will ignore the measurements when something sounds good. I'm sure we have all had speakers that sounded a little better with a few "wrinkles".
Let me clarify a bit... I think it comes down to putting expectations on the response of his fancy measurement rig. Given the disparities the Klippel rig has compared to the measurements, say, Harman has of their speakers I believe not only Amir's opinions but definitely the Klippel measurements just need perspective. Lots of perspective. Like remembering that close-micing all drivers at all axes it is not... possible to get accurate data. Rooms are not the same, etc. Amir is playing a dual role of objectivist and subjectivist - that doesn't work. Zaph for all his warts, never imposed subjectivity on us.
The saxophones (Alto/Tenor) have an unmistakable sound to them and a great way to adjust your EQ/judge your speakers FR.
If it doesn't convince your ear and grab you then something is off - either your audio system or the original recording.
Guess which one is correct.
4.5 Khz, baby . . . play with it . . .
I think all reviewers are stuck in a flawed position.
We want data that we can understand but we also want to know did you like the way it sounds.
Like most other reviewers you can see his preferences and make a decision that suits you.
I don't think his methods are any more flawed than those of reviewers that don't give you any data. Like Zeos or Audiopheliac. I enjoy all of their opinions for what they are.
Honest question: how should we mix the data with the subjective?
I like that MAC can have these discussions rather than call anyone who disagrees with us "flat earthers"
Honestly, I prefer the Stereophile approach. The subjective review portions range from insightful to ironic and sometimes outright ridiculous, but they do provide some decent measurements along with commentary that often touches on why the subjective reviews went the way they did. This is somewhat rare. Perfect? Of course not - no review process is.
I generally take measurements with a bit of salt - my own included. It has taken me a lot of years to correlate my measurements with good sound, as I have gotten better at that my voicing stages get shorter and shorter. Trust the microphone and trust the FFT, and you can eliminate a significant chunk of listening fatigue, which leads to quite a few errors, especially in tweeter padding. Anyways, the modern Klippel system is another great tool but it is not exactly exempt from the laws of physics regarding wave length, piston size, and first reflections. I think that is where some of the disparity presents between the Klippel system and the measurements taken in near-anechoic environment. Basically, we have to keep certain things in mind when comparing measurements from two distinctly different approaches. In DIY especially, we don't always take the best care in repeatability in our measurements.
If only Stereophile could splice near and far field measurements properly. At least they’re consistent…