Hi Kevin,
I couldn´t find information about magnet material. Do you know if its neodym or alnico as it was in the old designs (eg. limited Gold, old Meister)?
You´re right, in order to gather best performance out of a SPU cart everything else needs to be in place and from best quality. It´s recognizable with mc transformer, phono stage, turntable, tonearm and even all other parts of the setup.
Since I´m going to DIY on something like cost no object level (interstage transformers, mostly no caps in signal path, oil filled MP caps, prooven good quality components as there are Lundahl, Tango for instance) luckily my setup is able to scetch all those deiffernces we are talking about.
Yes improvements and differences are audible and someone might describe those as incremental. But due to the fact that some of these differences result in a change of tonality and timbre it´s more likely an issue of personal taste on other hand.
Thus people looking for HiFi sound might prefer the Royal N, people addicted to music and stuck to best linearity in reproduction might tend to the old Meister.
If I understood your description of the A95 right, it might be playing and perfroming closer to the old Gold and therefore more on the musical and not on the HiFi side.
I do use the 12" Schick as well as 9" Schick tonearm with my SPUs as well as FR-64s. Furthermore I do agree that pairing the Schick tonearm with SPU is a really great combination with at least beeing capable of making very incremental changes in spatiality, tonality, timbre and resolution. Same with FR-64s.
Furthermore I gave my SME-3012 a try with SPU but this combination doesn´t reach out the same level as the Schick or FR-64s did.
So my suggestion for appropriate and good performing tonearms with SPU would be Schick, FR-64s, Ortofon RMG-309.
SME-3012, Ultra Craft AC-400 M II or AC.4000, SONY PUA-286 or Jelco 750L would be next, with Rega, Origin Live and others only when no other option is available and Triplanar, Hadcock, Denon tonearms a NoGo.
Again I totally agree, beating the performance of a Schick would mean to spend considerably more money on a tonearm. Thus the Schick gives you best performance for your bucks; but not only with SPU.
I couldn´t find information about magnet material. Do you know if its neodym or alnico as it was in the old designs (eg. limited Gold, old Meister)?
You´re right, in order to gather best performance out of a SPU cart everything else needs to be in place and from best quality. It´s recognizable with mc transformer, phono stage, turntable, tonearm and even all other parts of the setup.
Since I´m going to DIY on something like cost no object level (interstage transformers, mostly no caps in signal path, oil filled MP caps, prooven good quality components as there are Lundahl, Tango for instance) luckily my setup is able to scetch all those deiffernces we are talking about.
Yes improvements and differences are audible and someone might describe those as incremental. But due to the fact that some of these differences result in a change of tonality and timbre it´s more likely an issue of personal taste on other hand.
Thus people looking for HiFi sound might prefer the Royal N, people addicted to music and stuck to best linearity in reproduction might tend to the old Meister.
If I understood your description of the A95 right, it might be playing and perfroming closer to the old Gold and therefore more on the musical and not on the HiFi side.
I do use the 12" Schick as well as 9" Schick tonearm with my SPUs as well as FR-64s. Furthermore I do agree that pairing the Schick tonearm with SPU is a really great combination with at least beeing capable of making very incremental changes in spatiality, tonality, timbre and resolution. Same with FR-64s.
Furthermore I gave my SME-3012 a try with SPU but this combination doesn´t reach out the same level as the Schick or FR-64s did.
So my suggestion for appropriate and good performing tonearms with SPU would be Schick, FR-64s, Ortofon RMG-309.
SME-3012, Ultra Craft AC-400 M II or AC.4000, SONY PUA-286 or Jelco 750L would be next, with Rega, Origin Live and others only when no other option is available and Triplanar, Hadcock, Denon tonearms a NoGo.
Again I totally agree, beating the performance of a Schick would mean to spend considerably more money on a tonearm. Thus the Schick gives you best performance for your bucks; but not only with SPU.
Hi Rolf,
I'm actually not sure what the magnets are made of in the SPU A95, but people have alleged that it is neo.. I'm one of a very small number of people in this neck of the woods who owns one, and I ordered one for a friend in TX at the same time. No one I can ask around here. Mine is a very low serial # as it was ordered right at the beginning of the run. (Long wait!) In a strange way it was very exciting because I have never owned anything that was quite this exclusive.
I would say that while the SPU A95 captures the traditional sound of the SPU in some sense, it is actually a much better cartridge that the Royal N which in turn is better than anything else I own. It is more musical, but it is more of everything else too, it somehow reaches both deeper into the music and does it more cleanly than anything else I have heard. It's clearly special. I will eventually start to save my pennies for an Xpression, but not for a little while yet. (I had an SPU A90 on long term loan, and my impressions of the two are that while Ortofon claims incremental improvements for the A95 they might be more than slightly understating the case.)
I suspect the tracking behavior I alluded to might be a function of break in or even a slightly less optimum LF resonance as compared to the Royal N on the Technihard shell, the compliance of both cartridges is rated the same so...
My system is all transformer coupled at this point except in the phono stages where I use conventional RC coupling, passive EQ and Lundahl SUTs (LL1941) Line stage output, EQ and power amps are all balanced. My latest line stage will also have some balanced inputs..
I am a big fan of Monolith Magnetics and have a pair of custom IT on the way for my power amps, this should help to flatten out the LF response of the amps and reduce distortion a bit. (Currently using LL1635/20mA which perform pretty well, but were a budgetary and sourcing compromise - the MM are very expensive in comparison.)
I'm actually not sure what the magnets are made of in the SPU A95, but people have alleged that it is neo.. I'm one of a very small number of people in this neck of the woods who owns one, and I ordered one for a friend in TX at the same time. No one I can ask around here. Mine is a very low serial # as it was ordered right at the beginning of the run. (Long wait!) In a strange way it was very exciting because I have never owned anything that was quite this exclusive.
I would say that while the SPU A95 captures the traditional sound of the SPU in some sense, it is actually a much better cartridge that the Royal N which in turn is better than anything else I own. It is more musical, but it is more of everything else too, it somehow reaches both deeper into the music and does it more cleanly than anything else I have heard. It's clearly special. I will eventually start to save my pennies for an Xpression, but not for a little while yet. (I had an SPU A90 on long term loan, and my impressions of the two are that while Ortofon claims incremental improvements for the A95 they might be more than slightly understating the case.)
I suspect the tracking behavior I alluded to might be a function of break in or even a slightly less optimum LF resonance as compared to the Royal N on the Technihard shell, the compliance of both cartridges is rated the same so...
My system is all transformer coupled at this point except in the phono stages where I use conventional RC coupling, passive EQ and Lundahl SUTs (LL1941) Line stage output, EQ and power amps are all balanced. My latest line stage will also have some balanced inputs..
I am a big fan of Monolith Magnetics and have a pair of custom IT on the way for my power amps, this should help to flatten out the LF response of the amps and reduce distortion a bit. (Currently using LL1635/20mA which perform pretty well, but were a budgetary and sourcing compromise - the MM are very expensive in comparison.)
Hello! I suppose there are some vintage-audio gurus reading this thread, so I have a few questions: some time ago I bought bunch of components that belonged to a TV repair shop guy who has passed away a long time ago. I found a box with pair of used Jorgen Schou 0,32M type input trafos NO:389/2. Primary is 50ohm (non ct) or 200ohm CT and sec. 100k. It reads also 1:1:45 FFR. So, do you guys have any idea from where these are pulled out? What means the ratio 1:1:45, is it that each primary has 1:45 ratio to secondary? And finally, what should I build for these 
Cheers; Kari T
Cheers; Kari T
PRR -Thanks for reply! So this is not belong on this thread actually, I was thinking that these might be some old phono-stuff.. I think also that they couldn't be tube mic trafos cos they have smaller ratio's (not really know) but preamp stuff not come to my mind..
It would be interesting to know what is the history of these units.. Another was opened for some reason (somebody has put dampening rubber between the cans), I tested them for my poor signal generator, drive the 100k side of 7Vpp square and found overshooting after 20kHz without any load on secondaries except my old fluke scopemeter.. might need some zobel or load..
There are pictures of them:
It would be interesting to know what is the history of these units.. Another was opened for some reason (somebody has put dampening rubber between the cans), I tested them for my poor signal generator, drive the 100k side of 7Vpp square and found overshooting after 20kHz without any load on secondaries except my old fluke scopemeter.. might need some zobel or load..
There are pictures of them:
Attachments
Try to put on secondary a standard 47 kohm
If you put the primary in series you got a reflects impedance of 96 ohm and the ratio of 22,5, 27 dB
So you can attach an MC with 3-9 ohm of impedance.
About the freq. answer if you have a good sound card and ARTA software you will find an answer.
To adapt the Zout of sound card you can put in parallel to it a resistor of, p.e., 4,7 ohm.
Then with a good tester you will read on secondary, p.e., 100 mV the you can use a sweep.
If the sound card is 24bit/192 kHz until 96 kHz you can see the freq. answer
Walter
If you put the primary in series you got a reflects impedance of 96 ohm and the ratio of 22,5, 27 dB
So you can attach an MC with 3-9 ohm of impedance.
About the freq. answer if you have a good sound card and ARTA software you will find an answer.
To adapt the Zout of sound card you can put in parallel to it a resistor of, p.e., 4,7 ohm.
Then with a good tester you will read on secondary, p.e., 100 mV the you can use a sweep.
If the sound card is 24bit/192 kHz until 96 kHz you can see the freq. answer
Walter
The thread is old but the subject remains hot.
My question - -
I have a SPU on a Thorens, it is a naked version, if I am correct, 250 micro volt.
- I used to have a hybrid 2SK240/Ecc88 first stage and 6SN7 second with split passive filter and all was fine. [But one of the 2SK240 pairs broke down, the Idss was not stable, enter gate current, and moving to single 2SK240 per channel broke the magic I had]
At the moment I have the rather old Nakamichi MB-150 MC amplifier and use it at the +22 dB setting - with the EAR834. This gives me ample sound level. At 38dB it is overkill and the sound deteriorates. The EAR834 phono has an output that is in general some +6dB relative to most other phono amps.
Now I have the idea to invest in a SUT. Because +22 dB is good enough, I think that 1:10 is good enough. More than 1:13 is not needed. I read sometimes the Lundahls are a bit aggressive or hard. I look for the old mellow sound. I understand that higher winding ratio's tend to imply a trade-off of gain versus details/bandwidth.
My list:
I read a lot here about the Lundahls (specially the LL1941 comes to mind, too expensive..) but the LL1943 should be comparable. But none of the others are mentioned, specifically Sowter is a real hidden gem I think. deeply hidden. In the bottom drawer it seems. far out of sight. #Kevinr "my LL1741 ratio is ~ 1:32 and I really do need the gain which is about 30dB."
- That high gain really is not my thing. Not needed.
Any feedback appreciated.
Else - I would pull the trigger on the Sowter. Size matters. Ahum.
My question - -
I have a SPU on a Thorens, it is a naked version, if I am correct, 250 micro volt.
- I used to have a hybrid 2SK240/Ecc88 first stage and 6SN7 second with split passive filter and all was fine. [But one of the 2SK240 pairs broke down, the Idss was not stable, enter gate current, and moving to single 2SK240 per channel broke the magic I had]
At the moment I have the rather old Nakamichi MB-150 MC amplifier and use it at the +22 dB setting - with the EAR834. This gives me ample sound level. At 38dB it is overkill and the sound deteriorates. The EAR834 phono has an output that is in general some +6dB relative to most other phono amps.
- My next project is a LCR phono (I have the Sowter LCR package on my list) and then I have every flexibility regarding the gain structure. So 1:20 would be enogh.
Now I have the idea to invest in a SUT. Because +22 dB is good enough, I think that 1:10 is good enough. More than 1:13 is not needed. I read sometimes the Lundahls are a bit aggressive or hard. I look for the old mellow sound. I understand that higher winding ratio's tend to imply a trade-off of gain versus details/bandwidth.
My list:
- Sowter 1480, (expensive,) at 1:10 it looks right to me. +20 dB. This transformer is their premium transformer and one of the well-selling ones, they even prioritize in the manufacturing. However, I find no recommendations re SPU about it. They themselves recommend it for the SPU too.
- LL9226XL,( in comparison, cheap). Available at 1:13, this about +22 dB. Mu metal core, might be rather soft and intimate on the mid/high? I have no idea actually what a mu-metal core does, except that Lundahl says it is for an old fashioned listening. But I appreciate that.
- LL1943 (affordable) and at 1:16 a bit higher at +24 db. Lineair magnetization nickel core. After insertion/core losses of 1,5 dB it is correct...?
- I also saw the Silvercore SPU version. Expensive too, same price as Sowter. Unknownst to me are any details. Probably 1:20. Or higher even. They just say: Trust Us.
I read a lot here about the Lundahls (specially the LL1941 comes to mind, too expensive..) but the LL1943 should be comparable. But none of the others are mentioned, specifically Sowter is a real hidden gem I think. deeply hidden. In the bottom drawer it seems. far out of sight. #Kevinr "my LL1741 ratio is ~ 1:32 and I really do need the gain which is about 30dB."
- That high gain really is not my thing. Not needed.
Any feedback appreciated.
Else - I would pull the trigger on the Sowter. Size matters. Ahum.
Maybe someone can also explain:
This SUT -- "is made with amorphous core material. As this type of core does not store energy (unlike e.g. conventional mu-metal cores) the low frequency resonance with external series capacitors is practically eliminated.".
Does that mean that the inverse is also true, a core that has no resonance effect is amorphous? ie the 1480??
This SUT -- "is made with amorphous core material. As this type of core does not store energy (unlike e.g. conventional mu-metal cores) the low frequency resonance with external series capacitors is practically eliminated.".
Does that mean that the inverse is also true, a core that has no resonance effect is amorphous? ie the 1480??
Hi triode_al,
All of that sounds like marketing speak to me. Amorphous core has less hysteresis than mu metal if I remember correctly, but otherwise an inductor or transformer wound on such a core behaves much like one wound on any other material. I am skeptical that a low frequency series or parallel LC resonance is materially altered by the core material - it is a function of the combination of inductive and capacitive reactance.
All of that sounds like marketing speak to me. Amorphous core has less hysteresis than mu metal if I remember correctly, but otherwise an inductor or transformer wound on such a core behaves much like one wound on any other material. I am skeptical that a low frequency series or parallel LC resonance is materially altered by the core material - it is a function of the combination of inductive and capacitive reactance.
Last edited:
Somewhat surprised to see that this thread lives some 12 years after I originally started it.
A lot has changed in the years since I last posted. I barely listen to any vinyl these days. I still have the SPU A95 and Lundahl LL1941 and LL1931 transformers. Cartridge in primary use is a Mutech Hiyabusa Two tables one with prototype Sorane ZA-12, and panasonic strain gauge cartridge, and the other a Jelco TK-850L with the Hiyabusa or SPU A95.
A lot has changed in the years since I last posted. I barely listen to any vinyl these days. I still have the SPU A95 and Lundahl LL1941 and LL1931 transformers. Cartridge in primary use is a Mutech Hiyabusa Two tables one with prototype Sorane ZA-12, and panasonic strain gauge cartridge, and the other a Jelco TK-850L with the Hiyabusa or SPU A95.
If it does not store energy, it can't be an inductance, an audio transformer.
Someone is just making this stuff up. I'd even say "some ignorant person" is making this stuff up.
Thanks. and about that material that does not store energy: Yes, I bought some (small, aliex) 600:600 amorphous core in the past. Man, that was ringing right out of the box, even with 600Ω termination. And I have a large aliex amorphous core intended for interstage - it did a good task as variable phase changer - it shifted from 0 to -100 degrees twice midway in the audioband. So my basic trust in aliex/el cheapo components is low. [I now use it as choke]
I've always had playing LPs seemingly to outperform CD's in relaxed atmosphere, warmth or in 'true' reproduction. That did not change when I went from Meridian multibit to PCM1704 NOS.
True being what I remember) . I always had Ortofon MC15, MC20, MC20 special, & SPU Classic NE now. That said, I have some opera's with the same recording on disk and LP - blind switching gave me no difference.
And while many old CD's lack dimensions, yes most new recording do have it, I agree.
But back to the SUT ! Do I understand amorf core is not intrinsically better? It is by nature smaller for sure because of its properties.
I've always had playing LPs seemingly to outperform CD's in relaxed atmosphere, warmth or in 'true' reproduction. That did not change when I went from Meridian multibit to PCM1704 NOS.
True being what I remember
) . I always had Ortofon MC15, MC20, MC20 special, & SPU Classic NE now. That said, I have some opera's with the same recording on disk and LP - blind switching gave me no difference. And while many old CD's lack dimensions, yes most new recording do have it, I agree.
But back to the SUT ! Do I understand amorf core is not intrinsically better? It is by nature smaller for sure because of its properties.
Last edited:
This statement can't be true. Any piece of wire (physical or simulated, cored or coreless) has inductance thus it will resonate with any capacitance present in the circuit. This includes those capacitances and inductances inside active elements: the grid to cathode of a tube, and inductance of the cathode wiring inside and outside the tube may resonate and created lots of issues to designers of VHF and UHF devices decades ago. And these inductances had no core.
Another example are linear series regulators. As the frequency goes high, the gain of the elements (error amplifier and series element) vanishes. So from the load view it can be seen like a simulated inductor because output impedance increases. This inductance can resonate with stray and added capacitances at the load making the regulator to break into oscillations in poorly designed circuits.
Osvaldo, this is a great statement. Unfortunately this is often overlooked.
Having a Zobel required network next to a transfomer might well have reverse audible effects, while the scope sees a lineair result (flat trace, good square).// At least my very limited understanding of transformers embaresses me.
Having a Zobel required network next to a transfomer might well have reverse audible effects, while the scope sees a lineair result (flat trace, good square).// At least my very limited understanding of transformers embaresses me.
Mainly in transformers directly in the audii chain. As the coupling between primary and secondary isn't perfect, there is leackage inductances both in primary and secondary(ies) winding(s). They will resinate at determinated frequency 1/2Pixsqtr(LxC). This isn't optional. It is as is. The only we can do is try to shift the resonance frequency to such a value that doesn't disturb us or to damp it. Zobels, snubbers and the like enters in the second group.