• WARNING: Tube/Valve amplifiers use potentially LETHAL HIGH VOLTAGES.
    Building, troubleshooting and testing of these amplifiers should only be
    performed by someone who is thoroughly familiar with
    the safety precautions around high voltages.

Phono stage design considerations part 1: choosing 1st stage tube

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
I care much more about the proportion of the higher harmonics, especially to odd ones, to the second.

In the D3a/RIAA/D3a, was it passive RIAA?

In the JFET/triode cascode front-end, which JFET and which triode did you use?

How would you compare the JFET/triode cascode front-end to a good SUT (sound-wise)?

Yes, low higher harmonics and avoiding increasing harmonics as you go down to low levels seem to be very important.
Passive all-in-one RIAA on mine - starting with approx 20k R1 , I was able to go down from 105k R1 on earlier designs to 20k with the D3a driving, and this gave improved dynamics and transparency .
On the jFet/triode cascode experiments, it was 2SK369 and tried D3a , E180F ( Mullard ) and E180F ( Russian ) above. Oddly the Russian E180F was best in this configuration, opposite of what you find using them in normal way .
See :
audio-talk :: View topic - j-FET / Triode Phono front-end
...if you have a few hours free !

On the pros/cons, it was a frustrating exercise.
I found the avoidance of the SUT ( in my case Tribute ) gave a very noticeable improvement in low bass and bass timing . On the other hand I could never quite get the upper-mids to sound completely natural with the jFet in there . I am very picky about mid & treble tone and 'realistic presence' .
I think some of the bass problems with SUT's are larger when using cartridges like the 103R ( as I do ) which have higher impedance ( 12R ) than modern high-end carts . If you use eg. ZYX R1000 then I would say stick with SUT at the front. Tribute are the best step-ups I've used , mine are the colbalt amorphous toroidal ones, I believe. Anyway, see my comments in the linked thread, towards the end .
There is more work going on in this area from Nick G at the moment.
Note that JC Morrison has some good advice in there as he and Joe Roberts were drawn into the debate.

Otherwise if you want to put in more time/money/effort then Vinylsavor's feelings about LCR are correct, it is ultimately the way to go if done right . There is a special integration of tone and dynamics between the bass and midrange that only seems to be achieved by the LCR-based designs, in my experience . I have the parts to go to 1.5k LCR-RIAA , just need to get the time to do it ....
 
How do you expect to achieve this goal, by intuition?

When evaluating a box of gain which has the task of making a small signal larger without adding noticeable noise and distortion, delivering the correct frequency response, and not overloading from ticks, pops, and mistracking, the important parameters are a good story, florid descriptions, and a conformance to preconceptions.

This won't win me the monetary award:D, but it has the virtue of being correct.
 
Yes, low higher harmonics and avoiding increasing harmonics as you go down to low levels seem to be very important.
Passive all-in-one RIAA on mine - starting with approx 20k R1 , I was able to go down from 105k R1 on earlier designs to 20k with the D3a driving, and this gave improved dynamics and transparency .
On the jFet/triode cascode experiments, it was 2SK369 and tried D3a , E180F ( Mullard ) and E180F ( Russian ) above. Oddly the Russian E180F was best in this configuration, opposite of what you find using them in normal way .
See :
audio-talk :: View topic - j-FET / Triode Phono front-end
...if you have a few hours free !

On the pros/cons, it was a frustrating exercise.
I found the avoidance of the SUT ( in my case Tribute ) gave a very noticeable improvement in low bass and bass timing . On the other hand I could never quite get the upper-mids to sound completely natural with the jFet in there . I am very picky about mid & treble tone and 'realistic presence' .
I think some of the bass problems with SUT's are larger when using cartridges like the 103R ( as I do ) which have higher impedance ( 12R ) than modern high-end carts . If you use eg. ZYX R1000 then I would say stick with SUT at the front. Tribute are the best step-ups I've used , mine are the colbalt amorphous toroidal ones, I believe. Anyway, see my comments in the linked thread, towards the end .
There is more work going on in this area from Nick G at the moment.
Note that JC Morrison has some good advice in there as he and Joe Roberts were drawn into the debate.

Otherwise if you want to put in more time/money/effort then Vinylsavor's feelings about LCR are correct, it is ultimately the way to go if done right . There is a special integration of tone and dynamics between the bass and midrange that only seems to be achieved by the LCR-based designs, in my experience . I have the parts to go to 1.5k LCR-RIAA , just need to get the time to do it ....

Hi,
Thank you.

That is a long thread, indeed.
Can you please link to you latest schematic?
I didn't find any SUT on Tribute's website. Is it special order only? What turns ratio do you have? How much does it cost?
 
diyAudio Chief Moderator
Joined 2002
Paid Member
You are brave to pass DC current through the cartridge…:)

I knew that my DMM would not give too much current by checking drop on a 100R resistor test first, secondly I thought what the heck I can risk buying another in this sustained boost economy I live in after we control oil reserves and lending the EU, exporting luxury cars etc.:D
 
diyAudio Chief Moderator
Joined 2002
Paid Member
So, you got to choose. Much info has passed under the bridge. A hybrid circuit by Morgan Jones in 4th edition, Allen Wright, Island pink, or ss assisted tubes by SY, or Thomas Mayer purity discipline with fine SUT in most cases and in a few not. (In the end Koifarm has the best and you wouldn't know.) :)
 

iko

Ex-Moderator
Joined 2008
It's hard for me to understand why you "choose the 'best' which however, you cannot build for maybe years" instead of choosing "the best you could build/afford now and that will give you many years of listening pleasure until you can afford something that might be better."
 
Compared to a D3A a Ec8010 is more lineair and specially the Cag is much lower, 1,5pF vs 2,7pF. But S and µ is better for a D3A.

Btw, a lcr is a no go to me. You never get good enough chokes for this: low precision and variable with signal.

Hi,
Thank you.



How does it compare to other contenders, regarding the list of my priorities?



None yet, I'm considering S&B TX 103.
 
It's hard for me to understand why you "choose the 'best' which however, you cannot build for maybe years" instead of choosing "the best you could build/afford now and that will give you many years of listening pleasure until you can afford something that might be better."

The answer to your pondering is very simple.
The cartridge I have is possibly one of the best there is.
I have already a phono stage which is quite good-sounding and I enjoy listening to it.
Building something a little bit better, and then something else a little bit better and so on will cost me more money than going right to the best. So even if it will take me a while to get the money, in the end it will be worth my while.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.