GoodSoundClub - Romy the Cat's Audio Site

09-02-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	127
Post ID:	16924
Reply to:	16921

The stupid 5uF cap on AC side

N-set wrote:
(feel free to re/move this post to the electricity thread)
As the power supply I'd regard everything from the power generator in the power plant down to the actual load.
Why the power transformer should be the cutting line?
I do hear your voice clearly re "common sense". What my stupid brain refuses to understand however
is how comes that the rectifiers, chokes, and other PS crap is invisible but a stupid 5u cap in the main line
does make a difference? If the signal feels it it means the load is not truly isolated for whatever reason?
Or am I a complete idiot (very probable)? I don't expect concrete answers, I'm just wondering loud.
BTW I did not of course connect the earth of the filters exactly to avoid those caps from lines to earth.
I also tried to look at the filter chcracteristics, but I'd rather look into tarot cards...

I do not say that rectifiers, chokes, and other PS crap are invisible. We do not have ways to abstract tier visibility out of experiments. We can use other rectifiers, chokes, and other PS craps but we can’t not drive PS without them. The last filtering caps do minimize the difference between rectifiers, chokes, and filtering craps. Otherwise you can use your 300B amps with typical 8uF of filtering crap in B+ and then writhe long posts at DIYaudio.com site about different lamination of your choke if different tube socket on your rectifier “dramatically” changes the sound of your amp.
The stupid 5uF cap on primary is very different than anything else. The rectifiers, chokes, and caps of PS are DC polarized. They deal with ripples but the dialectics are charge with DC. A cap in put AC has no biased dielectric and as a result all dielectrics are vibrating (they are dielectrics but they are partially chargeable) and smear the termination of transmission line. I do not insist that that is THE reason but this is the ONLY explanation I have. I do not know why by caps on AC side do not work. Take an air or vacuum cap with no dielectric and you will not have problem with sound on AC side. I do not really dig the reason for all of it as it truly not really fascinates me. I did discover that cap on AC side is problem and I use this knowledge, rather then explaining it. Feel free to conduct your own experiment and find the explanation of the results.

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

09-03-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	129
Post ID:	16929
Reply to:	16928

It is only partially outside the context.

N-set wrote:

Hm...If taken outside the context, I'd swear we are talking about some critical cap in a feedback loop.

The reality is that the subject of a cap on primary of transformer is very much in context of my phonocorrector. One of the main premises of my phonocorrector is the use caps with no dielectric in the application where there is no DC biasing in the capacitor. Ironically the use in phonocorrector feedback or the use on the primary of transformer the caps serve in the very identical conditions end exposed to the very same problems ....

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

09-04-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 617
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #:	130
Post ID:	16942
Reply to:	16916

A corrector with an EQ controll

Romy the Cat wrote:

The real wet dream of mine, something that I would like to have but never went for is to have in the axis of the air caps a high precision step motor and a remote control that would allow me to modify the phono equalization based upon the given label, vintage and pressing. I would like to note that it would be absolutely problem free EQ, I just never had a chance to do…

There is an EMT unit (I'm not in the EMT fanclub, just found it by chance)
with a control (not remote however) of the EQ:

http://www.emt-studiotechnik.de/JPA66%20E.htm

Costs a fortune, what else one could expect from the house, and no idea how it sounds.
Actually in my assembly I'd have a space to put small motors.

Cheers,
Jarek
STACORE

09-04-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	131
Post ID:	16943
Reply to:	16942

There is EQ control and there are multiple curves.

N-set wrote:
There is an EMT unit (I'm not in the EMT fanclub, just found it by chance)
with a control (not remote however) of the EQ:

http://www.emt-studiotechnik.de/JPA66%20E.htm

Costs a fortune, what else one could expect from the house, and no idea how it sounds.
Actually in my assembly I'd have a space to put small motors.

There are number if phono-correctors that implement multiple EQ curves, the friendlier is probably is AMR PH-77. However, my feeling is that multiple EQ curves is not necessary right solutions, or at least the solution that I would like to have. You see, there are dozens of curves and in 50s and 60s different labels used all imaginary curves, not to mention that they do not very tightly follow the specifications of driven curve. I do not even mention that many recordings were recorded with no proper frequency balance. So, all of it EQ curves indiscrimination in my mind set the satiation that use of a specific fixed curve not really useful. I would rather prefer to have a regular remote-controlled graphic equalizer and I would be able by hearing to set proper balance 100s times better and faster than by guessing the curve or by any other means. Of cause, the graphic equalizers are no used in level of audio that I implied but we do have 2-band curve equalizer in phonostage anyhow, so why do not make the phonostage EQ naturally adjustable? The “naturally” is the key word in this as the implementation of slightly different sloped shall not bring any new EQ efforts.

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

09-04-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,657
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #:	132
Post ID:	16944
Reply to:	16942

Corresponding to ?

Repeatable turnover options would be the bomb, given that: one starts with a good idea of which curve should be used for a given "label"; there is a good way to keep track of where the thing is set, relatively speaking.

If twiddling aircap vanes, any relays, servos, etc. should be properly geared (low...), with a very accurate vernier and no lag or "over-run", and they should be kept out of the electrical matrix.

Remote or no, I do not see this as useful for tuning on-the-fly unless one is switching between label years, or the like, and in this case it would probably be best to use VR, even hard switching. Again, the switch itself looms large in this sort of loop. With hard, on-the-fly switching, a null-mute would be appreciated, and maybe even necessary.

My TAP pre-amp uses industrial computer relays; very reliable, dead quiet, and out of the loop, with separate PS.

Paul S

11-15-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	135
Post ID:	17369
Reply to:	5856

The baby is sick

I play a lot of LP recently and last night I noted that sound was quite bad. It was like a bad electricity day only atop of it sound has some kind of odd digitalization atop of everything. Of course I was blaming the PurePower 3000 but then I realized that my FM and my digital sounded fine. My mono arm loaded into another phonostage was fine but both of my stereo arms: reference and daily arms were horrible. In fact I did not recognize that reference arm was bad as well and I was fighting with my daily arm. I did some modification on it and I thigh that was the reason. Apparently it was not as my reference arm that I did not touch sounded in the very same way.

So, I think my “End of Life Phonostage” has died. There is nothing in there that might die and I did not touch it sine I move but something is wrong in there. The tubes died. I use the same tubes for 12 year in this phonostage, I did not test then for 5-6 year but 12AX7 shall not die suddenly like this. I did have fine sound 2 days back, it shell not take foe this tine one day to die. Anyhow, this requires investigations there is something very wrong with this phonostage now.

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

11-15-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 617
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #:	137
Post ID:	17371
Reply to:	17369

Mine too...

...but for a different reason.
After lots of traveling I'm finally back and continue my long lasting assault on 834.
Pieter kept his word and the nano core transformers (both his MkII and a experimental pair
on my yet bigger cores) are here. I removed all Holcos (finding a dale 2M resistor was a
challenge, allied has it RN55D version) and tried wiring in the transformers...the layout is bad, I don't like it
as the signal runs are long:

I also get a horrible hum....
Both 50Hz and 100Hz and much more, up to few kHz. No idea what's that.
Shorting the output of transformers
does bring the hum to normality (almost doesn't exist) in one channel, but not in the other.
Closing the signal box doesn't seem to help.
Sleepless nights are awaiting me...

Cheers,
Nset

Cheers,
Jarek
STACORE

11-15-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	138
Post ID:	17372
Reply to:	17371

To fight with hum in phonostages is fan.

Yes, the layout kind of not optimum. You might try to lay the transformers sidewise and to make the RCA atop, above the transformers. Still, I hope you understand that your hum has very little to do with layout. Properly grounded unit shell has no noise in open incisures. You need to play with grounds. I usually use by-pass ground techniques – never failed on me. One you find a proper grounding then whatever you will do with the corrector will produce no noise. BTW, I did ask anybody to mane the uploaded images identifiable, so please….

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

11-15-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	139
Post ID:	17373
Reply to:	17369

What the hell is going on!!!

Romy the Cat wrote:
I play a lot of LP recently and last night I noted that sound was quite bad. It was like a bad electricity day only atop of it sound has some kind of odd digitalization atop of everything. Of course I was blaming the PurePower 3000 but then I realized that my FM and my digital sounded fine. My mono arm loaded into another phonostage was fine but both of my stereo arms: reference and daily arms were horrible. In fact I did not recognize that reference arm was bad as well and I was fighting with my daily arm. I did some modification on it and I thigh that was the reason. Apparently it was not as my reference arm that I did not touch sounded in the very same way.

So, I think my “End of Life Phonostage” has died. There is nothing in there that might die and I did not touch it sine I move but something is wrong in there. The tubes died. I use the same tubes for 12 year in this phonostage, I did not test then for 5-6 year but 12AX7 shall not die suddenly like this. I did have fine sound 2 days back, it shell not take foe this tine one day to die. Anyhow, this requires investigations there is something very wrong with this phonostage now.

I can’t not find any other words then “what the fuck”. Two day back it was fine and then all of the sudden this crap is coming from two of my stereo arms! There is nothing in my phonostage that can die like this. I know the sound of dead 12AX7 – it is not it. The sound I have has full body with full LF but with some kind withering in upper MF. The higher it goes the more it breaks itself apart. It is not too huge but it is there and I hate it. Whoever heard my playback know that it goes up in frequency and amplitude there is no event – it very smooth, natural and non obtrusive. Now at higher it goes and as louder it gets it has more and more almost some kind of mechanical resonances overlying over sound. Dead tubes would not be doing it.

I did check everything in phonostage and everything measurable in there is perfect. The tubes are fine. Nevertheless, I did replace the tubes with no effects. Might be the transformer got burned by some kind of stray solar wind? I have no idea what to think. CD, moro arm, tuners and even tape machine sound fine but the arms connected to this phonostage are no good. Now, I need to recall all even over the last 2 days and see what the hell went wrong. I cooked pork shops on Saturdays, is it possible that God punishes me?

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

11-16-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 617
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #:	142
Post ID:	17376
Reply to:	17372

Hum points

Romy the Cat wrote:
Yes, the layout kind of not optimum. You might try to lay the transformers sidewise and to make the RCA atop, above the transformers. Still, I hope you understand that your hum has very little to do with layout. Properly grounded unit shell has no noise in open incisures. You need to play with grounds. I usually use by-pass ground techniques – never failed on me. One you find a proper grounding then whatever you will do with the corrector will produce no noise. BTW, I did ask anybody to mane the uploaded images identifiable, so please….

Yes, I understand all your points. I don't think I have any ground loops though--I tried your ground bypass technique and it didn't change anything so far. Apologies for the pic--I've uploaded it automatically and then realized that it was not named (in your gallery it's impossible to rename the file).

Cheers,
Jarek
STACORE

11-16-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	143
Post ID:	17377
Reply to:	17376

Beats and pieces.

rogier wrote:
It could be dirt (dust) in the aircaps..

Hm, a good point, I never consider how dust in aircaps might sound. I presume that it will be no difference as dialectic is air anyhow, it is beside the point that there. Still, the sonic difference between “clean” air caps and dirty is certainly not know to me. Nevertheless, I do not think that it is due to dirt in air caps as it would be developing slowly. My problem appears all of the sudden. Well, it might be a single piece of dirt all of the sudden shorted two aircaps sheets? In this care it would be juts drop in capacitance with change of RIAA cure. Sure, it is not hard to blow the aircaps. Juts to be on the save side I will run tonight inverted RIAA sweep and see if I am still flat. Subjectively I do not recognize any in frequency response in the records I know and I am very sensitive to it. The anti-RIAA sweep sill would be a good indicator…

Markus wrote:
... but did you clean your needles? And does this happen on all records or just specific ones?

I always clean needles. I even removed the headshells and inspected the needle and cantilevers as I thought that some metal dust was somehow attacked in my room and jammed suspension. Nope it was not the case and my cartridges are fine. The effect is happening on all records.

N-set wrote:
Yes, I understand all your points. I don't think I have any ground loops though--I tried your ground bypass technique and it didn't change anything so far.

Try to short the signal to ground at different points of the corrector and see how noise disappears. Literally go over the circuit from front to the end before and after each element and see if shoring it this specific location affects noise. If the specific location cares DC then use cap to short the signal. Does the corrector have noise without the transformer? If not then you need to find a proper interface between transformer and corrector. Most common problem (if your transformer is properly shielded that most likely not be the case) is that people use dual mono transformer with stereo correctors. I think it is what you do, I do it as well. So, to deal with it you need to connect grounds of your transformer together. Where to connect them and how to connect them to corrector is a big subject but for beginning to short the grounds of RCAs would be a good start. I do not know what Pieter use for shielding if it is one layer of mu-metal then it is not enough. BTW, a transformer has to have some room in the shielding can and some empty space around itself. The shielding layer must be separated by air and do not lay over each other. Anyhow, I am sure you will find the problems. It is impossible to remotely debug ham….

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

11-16-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	144
Post ID:	17379
Reply to:	17377

What else?

Hm, I took the anti-RIAA signal converted and run CD player into the phonostage. The RIAA curve was fine and the effect of the HF volume and frequency-depended quantization did not expose itself. So, it looks like the phonostage is not a problem after all. That is very good and… very bad as I have nothing to blame now. I did played with mono tonearm last week but it sound fine now, with no quantization and I think the stereo arms did sound fine after I finish with it. What the hell has happen with me stereo arms! How two arms might get “broken” like this if then never were even touched? Is it in cartridges? Is it tonearms (both at the same time!!!) Is it something environmental? The cables from both arms come to the same phonostage at the same entry jacks… is it possible that both cables pick some interference from something? The entire analog setup with max out volume has no more noise then it usually has, the noise is VERY low. You need to stay right at the mouth of horn to hear something. It is with 83dB gain in phonostage and 109dB sensitive acoustic system at… max out volume. My normal listening level is good 50dB down, so it is no noise or interference in cables. What else?

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

11-16-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

JJ Triode
Posts 99
Joined on 09-12-2007

Post #:	145
Post ID:	17380
Reply to:	17379

Suggestion for the phonocorrector problem

Romy,Try running the left and right signals from the stereo arms, one at a time, into the known-good mono phonocorrector. If the problem is not present then you know the stereo corrector is to blame.
Are both left and right channels in the stereo corrector sounding bad? Then check the power supply (unless it is a dual-mono supply, then it is very puzzling.) If the power supply is in a separate chassis, can you run the stereo corrector from the mono corrector's PS?
As Paul said, clean and tighten all cable connections, including in the AC and PS umbilicals.JJ

11-16-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	146
Post ID:	17381
Reply to:	17380

I do not think that it is electrical.

JJ Triode wrote:
Romy,Try running the left and right signals from the stereo arms, one at a time, into the known-good mono phonocorrector. If the problem is not present then you know the stereo corrector is to blame.
Are both left and right channels in the stereo corrector sounding bad? Then check the power supply (unless it is a dual-mono supply, then it is very puzzling.) If the power supply is in a separate chassis, can you run the stereo corrector from the mono corrector's PS?
As Paul said, clean and tighten all cable connections, including in the AC and PS umbilicals.JJ

Actually I do not blame phonocorrector anymore. If running the inverted RIAA signal across the corrector sounded fine than the phonostage is not guilty. Yes, both right channels sound identically bad. I do not believe that it has to do with anything electrical at this matter. It is mechanical as it has almost some kind of HF resonance texture. It feel like somebody play a loudspeaker that lays on a floor with drivers up and then spread super fine led shots over the drivers…. So, I do not think that it is electrical, I hope it is not psychological….

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

11-16-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 617
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #:	147
Post ID:	17382
Reply to:	17377

Veggie ham

I'm slowly getting somewhere. Disconecting transformers did bring the ham down, but to my surprise
not exactly to the level where it was before-it's unfortunately stronger.
And all this after my heroic removal of Holcos from the grids of V2.
The ham is there, its level varies from annoying (standard) to only lightly hearable depending on the orienation
of the signal and PS boxes (the PS box is closed, the signal is still open). Strangly it also decreases a bit
when I touch the case, possibly indicating a poor grounding of the cases, which is not the case given my religious
approach to it...the fight with ham continues, i'm still not in the position to start wityh the transformers...
BTW they seem like one layer of mumetal, i glued them to the Cu plate with silicone, but the cases wanted to be
grounded (at least this is what I inferred)--hence a strips of braid in the picture.

Cheers,
Ham-Set

Cheers,
Jarek
STACORE

11-17-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	148
Post ID:	17384
Reply to:	17382

Do phonocorrector first then transformers.

N-set wrote:
I'm slowly getting somewhere. Disconecting transformers did bring the ham down, but to my surprise not exactly to the level where it was before-it's unfortunately stronger. And all this after my heroic removal of Holcos from the grids of V2. The ham is there, its level varies from annoying (standard) to only lightly hearable depending on the orienation of the signal and PS boxes (the PS box is closed, the signal is still open). Strangly it also decreases a bit when I touch the case, possibly indicating a poor grounding of the cases, which is not the case given my religious approach to it...the fight with ham continues, i'm still not in the position to start wityh the transformers... BTW they seem like one layer of mumetal, i glued them to the Cu plate with silicone, but the cases wanted to be grounded (at least this is what I inferred)--hence a strips of braid in the picture.

Well, you need to get rid of transformers and to make your phonocorrector to have no noise of any kind with any transformers. From MM level you need to have no more then 1-3mV AC at output and absolute not noise. After you do it, then you can add transformers to start to play with it.

Yes, one layer of mumetal is not enough. Theright configuration is 4 layers separated by space: mumetal, aluminum, copper and steel. Each of the layer works with own shielding and it is very good to give for transformers at list 2-3 inches or more of free space around them before the first internal layer. Mumetal might be eliminated if steel is very think, I would say with 1/3-1/2 inch you might stat do not worry about mumetal.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

11-18-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	149
Post ID:	17388
Reply to:	17379

Holly idiocy!

Romy the Cat wrote:
Hm, I took the anti-RIAA signal converted and run CD player into the phonostage. The RIAA curve was fine and the effect of the HF volume and frequency-depended quantization did not expose itself. So, it looks like the phonostage is not a problem after all. That is very good and… very bad as I have nothing to blame now. I did played with mono tonearm last week but it sound fine now, with no quantization and I think the stereo arms did sound fine after I finish with it. What the hell has happen with me stereo arms! How two arms might get “broken” like this if then never were even touched? Is it in cartridges? Is it tonearms (both at the same time!!!) Is it something environmental? The cables from both arms come to the same phonostage at the same entry jacks… is it possible that both cables pick some interference from something? The entire analog setup with max out volume has no more noise then it usually has, the noise is VERY low. You need to stay right at the mouth of horn to hear something. It is with 83dB gain in phonostage and 109dB sensitive acoustic system at… max out volume. My normal listening level is good 50dB down, so it is no noise or interference in cables. What else?

Well, I have fixed my analog. It has no relation to phonostage but as long I did blamed the phonostage above than I post resolution in the same thread. The reason was my dust tonearm. I do not have an idea why it did it bit as long I remove it the problem disappear. I have two dust tonearm on my TT the light-duty with brash and heavy duty with brash and roll. The light-duty dust tonearm was installed on the armboard of my Second stereo arm. Of cause there was nothing vibrating or shaking on that dust-arm but apparently my TT did not think so, even thogh I did not even use this dust-arm with stereo catrighes. If somebody would tell me that this light dust-arm installed on very platter and on TT like Micro 8000 would be able to effect anything I would not believe. However, the fact is fact – putting it back I got my “quantization” of sound back and removing it did remove the quantization. The mono arm apparently did not pick up the responses from the dust-arm as the mono arm instated on the other side of the TT or perhaps because mono cartridges are more immune against all of this.

Again, it is absolutely absurdity but it is what it is. BTW, here is a good concussion from the story – it shall be nothing, absolutely nothing, which might be sitting on the TT platter. I have a luxury of having wide and comfortable platter on which I have a habit to put a lot of superfluous crap. Not when I do it I would think twice, or at least listen once.

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

11-20-2011

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

N-set
Gdansk, Poland
Posts 617
Joined on 01-07-2006

Post #:	150
Post ID:	17392
Reply to:	17384

Yes sir

Romy the Cat wrote:
Well, you need to get rid of transformers and to make your phonocorrector to have no noise of any kind with any transformers. From MM level you need to have no more then 1-3mV AC at output and absolute not noise. After you do it, then you can add transformers to start to play with it.

It wants to be shielded. I've lined the inside of the signal steel/alu case with a copper foil (for furtherreference 0.3mm foil is way
too thich and hard to work with), closed the case and the ham is gone, my phono is vegetarian again!
No minor changes in layout could kill the ham with case open---the pickup from the PS was too strong
(my cabel is very short, 60cm of f...cking stiff cardas twisted pair f...ck! I'll double it soon). This makes me think to line the
inside of the PS case with the foil too so that it does not vomit the garbage all over tha place...

Now the fun begins with connecting the transformers...let's see...

Cheers,
Nset

Cheers,
Jarek
STACORE

	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	665258	05-31-2004
»	New	The Expressive Technologies SU-1..	“too bright” or “resolution” or “details” with SUT prim...	Analog Playback Forum	33	376066	12-30-2004
»	New	EAR 834P Modification Guide..	The cap will not change volume in the pass band...	Analog Playback Forum	45	639024	02-09-2006
»	New	My Analog Playback: the fat lady has sung..	My analog setup update....	Analog Playback Forum	9	119454	04-04-2006
»	New	Phono stages with SU-1..	SU-1...	Analog Playback Forum	4	66067	11-23-2007
»	New	Chasing utopian better phono interconnect...	Did I miss something?...	Analog Playback Forum	6	110854	06-05-2008
»	New	Buying a last cartridge...	Lucky you...	Analog Playback Forum	80	810128	09-05-2008
»	New	EAR 834P mods..	The cap will not change volume in the pass band...	Analog Playback Forum	45	639024	11-04-2008
»	New	AMR PH-77: just another phonostage or more?..	Oh, yeah... the sound of the Thing Itself......	Analog Playback Forum	11	132318	07-05-2009
»	New	An interesting Russian pnonocorrector...	Uber-tweeky phono topologies deconstructed...	Analog Playback Forum	9	99301	03-01-2010
»	New	Expressive Technologies SU-1 and cartridge output and i..	MV and Ohms...	Analog Playback Forum	2	33604	07-07-2011
»	New	How to run MM-type cartridge into MC phonostage?..	Quite interesting....	Analog Playback Forum	6	67335	11-13-2011
»	New	The tales of two phonostages: Allnic and 834PT...	The tales of two phonostages: Allnic and 834PT....	Analog Playback Forum	0	23382	12-21-2011

	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	665258	05-31-2004
»	New	The Expressive Technologies SU-1..	“too bright” or “resolution” or “details” with SUT prim...	Analog Playback Forum	33	376066	12-30-2004
»	New	EAR 834P Modification Guide..	The cap will not change volume in the pass band...	Analog Playback Forum	45	639024	02-09-2006
»	New	My Analog Playback: the fat lady has sung..	My analog setup update....	Analog Playback Forum	9	119454	04-04-2006
»	New	Phono stages with SU-1..	SU-1...	Analog Playback Forum	4	66067	11-23-2007
»	New	Chasing utopian better phono interconnect...	Did I miss something?...	Analog Playback Forum	6	110854	06-05-2008
»	New	Buying a last cartridge...	Lucky you...	Analog Playback Forum	80	810128	09-05-2008
»	New	EAR 834P mods..	The cap will not change volume in the pass band...	Analog Playback Forum	45	639024	11-04-2008
»	New	AMR PH-77: just another phonostage or more?..	Oh, yeah... the sound of the Thing Itself......	Analog Playback Forum	11	132318	07-05-2009
»	New	An interesting Russian pnonocorrector...	Uber-tweeky phono topologies deconstructed...	Analog Playback Forum	9	99301	03-01-2010
»	New	Expressive Technologies SU-1 and cartridge output and i..	MV and Ohms...	Analog Playback Forum	2	33604	07-07-2011
»	New	How to run MM-type cartridge into MC phonostage?..	Quite interesting....	Analog Playback Forum	6	67335	11-13-2011
»	New	The tales of two phonostages: Allnic and 834PT...	The tales of two phonostages: Allnic and 834PT....	Analog Playback Forum	0	23382	12-21-2011