Hmm, I just bought beyerdynamic BV37536 (3;1) trans for my 1.5mV CG25GI MKII mono cart. -tinny little thing .....
Reportedly Cinemag 3440A is almost a copy of Altec 4722 and it works nicely with Dl103 as well. I had Cinemags and they are nice basic transformers but not a match to more expensive units like Hashimoto HM-3 which is also quite a bit better IMHO than touted Cinemag 1131/1254.
I'm using Lundahl LL1941 Amorphous Core MC step up transformers configured for 16X and prefer them to the Altec 4722 when I last compared using a GM E II. I found the Lundahl significantly more detailed and neutral sounding. (I compared a lot of transformers some years ago, and these landed on top of the heap of those compared in my system.)
I hate to say this since I'll be selling some on EBay, but... the 4722s aren't really all that wonderful. I think the reputation has to do with brand and vintage more than actual performance.
Have you done any measurements on the Lundahl? I'm thinking especially the square wave response with the actual load (R||C on the secondary).
Have you done any measurements on the Lundahl? I'm thinking especially the square wave response with the actual load (R||C on the secondary).
I did some limited frequency response measurements on the 4722 that I did not retain. I wasn't that impressed.
I did attempt some square wave measurements using the Wavetek but had some problems even though I used a resistive divider to simulate a 6 ohm source from a generator source of 600 ohms which worked fine with the Amber on sine measurements and with the Millet sound card interface, but not on square waves. I may try again at some point, I have since overhauled the wavetek.
I did attempt some square wave measurements using the Wavetek but had some problems even though I used a resistive divider to simulate a 6 ohm source from a generator source of 600 ohms which worked fine with the Amber on sine measurements and with the Millet sound card interface, but not on square waves. I may try again at some point, I have since overhauled the wavetek.
Yes, obviously I used a scope, didn't think I needed to spell that out.. LOL
The secondary load was 47K as found in my pre-amps - plan was to add a zobel on the secondary to clean up the square wave response. I was not able to get a decent square wave at the transformer input, and if I recall correctly the wave form at the output of the Wavetek generator was distorted as well whenever the transformer was connected. I was too busy to investigate further at the time. The generator was clean driving a resistive load and can drive loads down to 50 ohms directly. Now I am curious so I will have another look. (The network I have was just 590 ohms and six ohms in series, so approximately 100:1)
The secondary load was 47K as found in my pre-amps - plan was to add a zobel on the secondary to clean up the square wave response. I was not able to get a decent square wave at the transformer input, and if I recall correctly the wave form at the output of the Wavetek generator was distorted as well whenever the transformer was connected. I was too busy to investigate further at the time. The generator was clean driving a resistive load and can drive loads down to 50 ohms directly. Now I am curious so I will have another look. (The network I have was just 590 ohms and six ohms in series, so approximately 100:1)
Dear Kevin,
your work on different SPU setups is highly appretiated.
Well, I´ve dealed with mostly all versions of SPU that were produced with GM headshell (Classic GM/E, SPU Meister, SPU Synergy, SPU Royal Reference, SPU Meister Silver, SPU Gold old limited edition). Some of them I got directly out of the lab of Ortofon, where those carts were used in order to define the optimum perfromance and serial consistency. Others I aquired completely checked from former Ortofon Distribution guy in germany or new.
I´ve tested them with SME 3012, Schick 12", Schick 9", Fidelity Research FR-64s, SONY PUA-286 and Ortofon RMG-309 by using either Technics SP-15, Denon DP-80, Denon DP-7000, Garrard 401, Thorens TD-121 or EMT 930 motor units.
I totally agree. SPUs do crave for higher mass tonearms. SME-3012 needs to be early Series II or Series I, Schick 12" and 9" needs to be paired with cart mounted in G-Shell. Assosiating a SPU with FR-64s is a real dreamer.
Based on my experience I would go for the following ranking
SPU Gold (limited edition)
SPU Meister (lab copy)
SPU Meister (normal series copy)
SPU Royal Reference (lab copy)
SPU Meister Silver
SPU Synergy
SPU Classic GM/E
Sorry, I´ve missed that. Of course I was playing with several MC input transformers as well as several phono stages in the past. Thus those experiences I´ve gathered with
- on mc transformer side i gave a try:
Analog Tube Audio SPU
Ortofon STM72
Lundahl LL1681
Lundahl LL1941
Vortexion
UTC O-20
Supex transformers and others I played with in former times and when testing Fidelity Research and old Supex cartridges. For my ears those mc input transformer for low impedance cartridges with low output do behave very similar. A mc transoformer that´s working on high fidelity level with FR or Supex cartrides will perform at almost identical level and with almost similar tonality and spatiality with an Ortofon SPU cartridge.
- on phono stages side I gave a try:
DIY Octal Phono
DIY Paradise (Joachim Gerhard design)
DIY EAR 834p
DIY Xono
DIY Phono Dude
Many of your findings and experiences I´m able to agree on. Thus many thanks for your great achievement.
your work on different SPU setups is highly appretiated.
Well, I´ve dealed with mostly all versions of SPU that were produced with GM headshell (Classic GM/E, SPU Meister, SPU Synergy, SPU Royal Reference, SPU Meister Silver, SPU Gold old limited edition). Some of them I got directly out of the lab of Ortofon, where those carts were used in order to define the optimum perfromance and serial consistency. Others I aquired completely checked from former Ortofon Distribution guy in germany or new.
I´ve tested them with SME 3012, Schick 12", Schick 9", Fidelity Research FR-64s, SONY PUA-286 and Ortofon RMG-309 by using either Technics SP-15, Denon DP-80, Denon DP-7000, Garrard 401, Thorens TD-121 or EMT 930 motor units.
I totally agree. SPUs do crave for higher mass tonearms. SME-3012 needs to be early Series II or Series I, Schick 12" and 9" needs to be paired with cart mounted in G-Shell. Assosiating a SPU with FR-64s is a real dreamer.
Based on my experience I would go for the following ranking
SPU Gold (limited edition)
SPU Meister (lab copy)
SPU Meister (normal series copy)
SPU Royal Reference (lab copy)
SPU Meister Silver
SPU Synergy
SPU Classic GM/E
Sorry, I´ve missed that. Of course I was playing with several MC input transformers as well as several phono stages in the past. Thus those experiences I´ve gathered with
- on mc transformer side i gave a try:
Analog Tube Audio SPU
Ortofon STM72
Lundahl LL1681
Lundahl LL1941
Vortexion
UTC O-20
Supex transformers and others I played with in former times and when testing Fidelity Research and old Supex cartridges. For my ears those mc input transformer for low impedance cartridges with low output do behave very similar. A mc transoformer that´s working on high fidelity level with FR or Supex cartrides will perform at almost identical level and with almost similar tonality and spatiality with an Ortofon SPU cartridge.
- on phono stages side I gave a try:
DIY Octal Phono
DIY Paradise (Joachim Gerhard design)
DIY EAR 834p
DIY Xono
DIY Phono Dude
Many of your findings and experiences I´m able to agree on. Thus many thanks for your great achievement.
Hmm, I´ve done comparism with the Royal Reference mounted in GM-shell and on a AT headshell as well. Within GM-shell it´s sounding more relaxed and to the point; it´s more music, mounted separately it´s more hifi sound. I do like the Royal Reference in GM-shell better.
Furthermore difference between Meister Silver and Royal Reference is in tonality; higher mids are a bit sweeter and stickier with Royal Reference. Playing Led Zeppelin Stairways to heaven or Since I've been Loving You the Royal Reference is a bit too much, but with While Lotta Love this sticky sweet can be really charming. When playing classical music with SPU Royal Reference any violin gets a little touch of a Guaneri or Stradivari.
These days I've added an SPU A95 which after more than 100 hours of break in is clearly the best SPU I have heard yet. (Better than the SPU A90 imho.) I'd rank my Royal N next and Meister Silver last - all are very good. I sold the GM E II last year.
I really like the LL1941 configured for 16X with these cartridges. (Tried lots of others I liked less well)
I really like the LL1941 configured for 16X with these cartridges. (Tried lots of others I liked less well)
Kevin
What kind of phono stage do you run with your SPU's? I have to admit playing my true mono ortofon into Erno Borebly J-fet and it's fine but kind of dream about "poetic" approach of Sakuma and making dedicated SPU phonostage the minor problem being my designing ability pretty much confines copy and paste process ....
What kind of phono stage do you run with your SPU's? I have to admit playing my true mono ortofon into Erno Borebly J-fet and it's fine but kind of dream about "poetic" approach of Sakuma and making dedicated SPU phonostage the minor problem being my designing ability pretty much confines copy and paste process ....
I have several phono stages which are all of my own design, details are here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/213769-muscovite-6s3p-tube-phonostage.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/273817-muscovite-mini-iii-6n23p-phono-stage.html
The Muscovite is used with my best TD-124 MKII/Schick/SPU A95 combination. The Muscovite is a three chassis unit (two pre, one psu) of dual monaural construction, each channel has its own HV PSU, has a gain cascode up front using Russian 6S3P-EV triodes, driving a passive EQ (tightly matched PS caps) into a choke augmented, battery biased mu-follower again using 6S3P-EVs. Gain is 54dB plus an additional 24dB from Lundahl LL1941 amorphous core SUTs.. I design for very high output levels (3.0Vrms is possible depending on cartridge and recording) and my line stage only has 4dB of gain.. This represents my best effort on several fronts, and I am very happy with the results.
The Mini Muscovite is used with the TD-124/SME 3012 clone/SPU various and has an oddly similar topology but is a more modest design, it uses E86CC (yeah fancy NOS ones) again cascode driving a passive EQ with Russian teflon caps, the output is a hybrid mu-follower comprising 6S3P-EV loaded by a battery biased DN2540 mosfet. Battery bias is also applied to the 6S3P-EV.. Two chassis design with separate tube regulators for each channel's HV supply. This unit has around 50dB of gain, and LL1941 are used as step up devices. This unit is used with a Royal N and a Meister Silver.
SNR of both set ups is primarily limited by the thermal noise generated in the cartridges and transformers, and are extremely quiet. Input capacitance is pretty low and should match well with most MI and MM cartridges as well. (I just like LOMC much better)
My digital references are a Sony Hap Z1-ES and a heavily modified Sony SCD-777ES.. If I am not feeling lazy I have to admit that the top analog combo very easily outclasses both of these sources, and by a fair margin. The other set up is not quite there in some areas but matches the digital sources, it's a bit less resolving and more forgiving in general than the other.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/213769-muscovite-6s3p-tube-phonostage.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/273817-muscovite-mini-iii-6n23p-phono-stage.html
The Muscovite is used with my best TD-124 MKII/Schick/SPU A95 combination. The Muscovite is a three chassis unit (two pre, one psu) of dual monaural construction, each channel has its own HV PSU, has a gain cascode up front using Russian 6S3P-EV triodes, driving a passive EQ (tightly matched PS caps) into a choke augmented, battery biased mu-follower again using 6S3P-EVs. Gain is 54dB plus an additional 24dB from Lundahl LL1941 amorphous core SUTs.. I design for very high output levels (3.0Vrms is possible depending on cartridge and recording) and my line stage only has 4dB of gain.. This represents my best effort on several fronts, and I am very happy with the results.
The Mini Muscovite is used with the TD-124/SME 3012 clone/SPU various and has an oddly similar topology but is a more modest design, it uses E86CC (yeah fancy NOS ones) again cascode driving a passive EQ with Russian teflon caps, the output is a hybrid mu-follower comprising 6S3P-EV loaded by a battery biased DN2540 mosfet. Battery bias is also applied to the 6S3P-EV.. Two chassis design with separate tube regulators for each channel's HV supply. This unit has around 50dB of gain, and LL1941 are used as step up devices. This unit is used with a Royal N and a Meister Silver.
SNR of both set ups is primarily limited by the thermal noise generated in the cartridges and transformers, and are extremely quiet. Input capacitance is pretty low and should match well with most MI and MM cartridges as well. (I just like LOMC much better)
My digital references are a Sony Hap Z1-ES and a heavily modified Sony SCD-777ES.. If I am not feeling lazy I have to admit that the top analog combo very easily outclasses both of these sources, and by a fair margin. The other set up is not quite there in some areas but matches the digital sources, it's a bit less resolving and more forgiving in general than the other.
Can you please describe the difference between SPU Royal N (aka Reference when bought in G-Shell) in more detail? What changes did you recognize in tonality, timbre, spatiality and resolution?
With comparisms I´ve done i found Royal Reference (N) to react on VTA adjustment more detailed. In case VTA isn´t setup to 100% correct resolution and spatiality is lower then with Meister Silver, with Meister Silver reacting on VTA with more or less energy in hights.
The old Meister I found to be the SPU playing most consistently; of course one might get a bit more energy in hights with Meister Silver, Royal Reference and Gold, a little bit more charming timbre and tonality with Royal Reference or Gold but at the end of the day tonality and spatiality is scetched the most realistic way with Meister.
Thus I´m very interested in more details about those aspects you found with A95.
Bearing in mind that they now live on different turntables, but that I have swapped them from time to time I would say the biggest subjective differences are as follows.
Royal N definitely wins the trackability contest, I have encountered a few situations where the A95 will not quite track a passage that the N will. (None of my other cartridges will either, this is exceedingly rare but I have a few records where this is a problem)
The A95 is more neutral sounding and notably lacking in resonances compared to the Royal N or Meister Silver. It definitely offers greater resolution as well, I hear more low level and background detail with the A95 than with anything else I have owned. The bottom end is more extended and better controlled in the A95 even compared to the Royal N which is very good in this area.
Royal N definitely wins the trackability contest, I have encountered a few situations where the A95 will not quite track a passage that the N will. (None of my other cartridges will either, this is exceedingly rare but I have a few records where this is a problem)
The A95 is more neutral sounding and notably lacking in resonances compared to the Royal N or Meister Silver. It definitely offers greater resolution as well, I hear more low level and background detail with the A95 than with anything else I have owned. The bottom end is more extended and better controlled in the A95 even compared to the Royal N which is very good in this area.
Dear Kevin
many thanks for your reply and this description.
Interesting. Looking at specifications the A95 is closer to old limited Gold (335 copies back in 1989 only) than to Royal N. On other hand elliptical stylus providing more resolution than replicant tip is surprising but similar to experiences I've made also with my SPU armada
Maybe its more likely a question of frequency response and tonality with picking up more information from grooves with replicant tip but due to slight peaks in frequency responce those information are covered by peaks beside those frequencies. And elliptical stylus doesn't produce these peaks with giving overall better resolution?
many thanks for your reply and this description.
Interesting. Looking at specifications the A95 is closer to old limited Gold (335 copies back in 1989 only) than to Royal N. On other hand elliptical stylus providing more resolution than replicant tip is surprising but similar to experiences I've made also with my SPU armada
Maybe its more likely a question of frequency response and tonality with picking up more information from grooves with replicant tip but due to slight peaks in frequency responce those information are covered by peaks beside those frequencies. And elliptical stylus doesn't produce these peaks with giving overall better resolution?
I think the big difference is actually in the structure, suspension, and attention given to resonance control in the SPU A95 generator assembly. (It is one of the SLM based designs.) I suspect that the replicant stylus, a lighter cantilever, and the coil metallurgy of the N would result in even better performance, but then that would be serious competition to the A95 (non SPU) which costs a great deal more money than the SPU... Sort of a balancing act between cost and performance.
I really like the Windfeld, but it is just a bit north of what I can afford to spend.
We are talking very incremental improvements in performance and everything else needs to be in place to hear the differences between these cartridges. The Schick 12" arm is really a great combination with any SPU and you would have to spring for considerably more expensive arm to significantly better it.
I really like the Windfeld, but it is just a bit north of what I can afford to spend.
We are talking very incremental improvements in performance and everything else needs to be in place to hear the differences between these cartridges. The Schick 12" arm is really a great combination with any SPU and you would have to spring for considerably more expensive arm to significantly better it.