Why does percussion sound so 'good' on my entry/low-mid level phono ?!?
I chose 'good' instead of 'real' or accurate and put it quotes because I don't know what the hecks goin on! 😕
I got back to vinyl 4 years ago and I'm hearing things in songs 'I haven't heard before'
, the drums and percussive sounds (acoustic guitar string hits, ...) sound more 'put together', like a real instrument, more 'real' 😱
Entry (to lower mid), we're talkin': 😱
Table: Technics SL-220 and SL-23, ProLinear 1600, Realistic R-8010
Stylus: Orto OM5E w Stylus10, RedEd elliptical and conical, Stanton D71EE, Grado FT+, Shure (Realistic) R47ED
OK, the RIAA run from entry to ... sweet!: 😉
Cambridge 540P, Boozehound style simple JFET w batt, Pass Pearl 1.5 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/anal...l2-pcb-but-havent-started-yet-pearl1-5-a.html), Elliott's 06, and soon ... PMA's OPENAMP1!
... oh, and I almost forgot 'cause I'm used to digital; my own, others, yard sale and used bins at the local Record Stores for albulms. [Source]
🙂
But still, I'm likin what I'm hearin !
Is there something special about percussive signals?
Something special in the way analog can process these types of signals?
😎
Or is it the other way around, ... is my phono chain somewhere exaggerating some aspect of percussion? Freq resp, special type of dist, ...
... or is it because I'm 43 with a rolloff at 16k and phono is tweaking some sort of 'this is how music sounds" from my emotional past ?!?
I'm no audiophool
, I'm fully aware of some of the limitations of phono: low freq mono, channel 'separation', wow/flutter, setup that affects er, everything ... 
Still, ... why does percussion sound so 'good' on my entry level phono ?!?
Cheers,
Jeff
I chose 'good' instead of 'real' or accurate and put it quotes because I don't know what the hecks goin on! 😕
I got back to vinyl 4 years ago and I'm hearing things in songs 'I haven't heard before'
, the drums and percussive sounds (acoustic guitar string hits, ...) sound more 'put together', like a real instrument, more 'real' 😱Entry (to lower mid), we're talkin': 😱
Table: Technics SL-220 and SL-23, ProLinear 1600, Realistic R-8010
Stylus: Orto OM5E w Stylus10, RedEd elliptical and conical, Stanton D71EE, Grado FT+, Shure (Realistic) R47ED
OK, the RIAA run from entry to ... sweet!: 😉
Cambridge 540P, Boozehound style simple JFET w batt, Pass Pearl 1.5 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/anal...l2-pcb-but-havent-started-yet-pearl1-5-a.html), Elliott's 06, and soon ... PMA's OPENAMP1!
... oh, and I almost forgot 'cause I'm used to digital; my own, others, yard sale and used bins at the local Record Stores for albulms. [Source]
🙂
But still, I'm likin what I'm hearin !
Is there something special about percussive signals?
Something special in the way analog can process these types of signals?
😎Or is it the other way around, ... is my phono chain somewhere exaggerating some aspect of percussion? Freq resp, special type of dist, ...
... or is it because I'm 43 with a rolloff at 16k and phono is tweaking some sort of 'this is how music sounds" from my emotional past ?!?
I'm no audiophool
, I'm fully aware of some of the limitations of phono: low freq mono, channel 'separation', wow/flutter, setup that affects er, everything ... Still, ... why does percussion sound so 'good' on my entry level phono ?!?
Cheers,
Jeff
Last edited:
I would guess you are mostly listening to the drive system. I have a very cheap JVC DD. In most ways better than a Linn LP12 I have on the things you mention. The LP12 is more moody and thought provoking. However it is not as good as the JVC on verve. The cheapest turntable I have heard to do most things well is Lenco GL75.
For the moment I am using a Quad 33 303. I have built friends phono stages so very aware of how limited the 33 is. It's phono stage is as simple as is possible and not in a good way. Even so it is mostly the LP12 that is the problem. It is not a cheapo one either and I have set up hundreds of them.
I have a Garrard 401 to fix up. That will be the best of all worlds.
For the moment I am using a Quad 33 303. I have built friends phono stages so very aware of how limited the 33 is. It's phono stage is as simple as is possible and not in a good way. Even so it is mostly the LP12 that is the problem. It is not a cheapo one either and I have set up hundreds of them.
I have a Garrard 401 to fix up. That will be the best of all worlds.
Vinyl adds audible harmonic distortion.
What does that mean for the perception of sound?
The ear has about 30 mechanical filters build in. As a sine wave of certain level hits the ear, one of those filters gets exited and a sound of a certain loudness is heard. If we add harmonic distortion, more filters get exited and as a result we perceive this as more loudness. Note that the absolute level of the sound hasn't changed!
With vinyl (and tape) the added harmonics are dynamic. This means that the higher the level of the signal, the more harmonic distortion is added to the signal. And more inner ear filters are exited, resulting in more perceived loudness. Iow Percussive sounds have more impact.
What does that mean for the perception of sound?
The ear has about 30 mechanical filters build in. As a sine wave of certain level hits the ear, one of those filters gets exited and a sound of a certain loudness is heard. If we add harmonic distortion, more filters get exited and as a result we perceive this as more loudness. Note that the absolute level of the sound hasn't changed!
With vinyl (and tape) the added harmonics are dynamic. This means that the higher the level of the signal, the more harmonic distortion is added to the signal. And more inner ear filters are exited, resulting in more perceived loudness. Iow Percussive sounds have more impact.
My theory is we measure the start and stop points as the first question. Oxford University stated the ear to have upwards of 30% THD. One can imagine if the distortion of the source and the ear match then it can decode the music. It might even be a Quantum problem. The nose seems to work as ears so why not the ears being a bit odd in how they work?
I am very unhappy with the conjecture that distortion we "see " in amplifiers is in anyway true of humans processing music. There was a conjecture water on Earth came from comets. It now seems less likely. Up to a few weeks ago it was mostly stated as fact.
I suspect what people who cling to the distortion model are saying is . I have heard nice sounds. I have no idea why they are nice. I will not abandon the little I know to have a sound like that. Also at least the sceince of what they own is OK and it is them who might be failing the equipemet? Kings new suit ?
I don't mean to be rude saying this. I just find the " sorry chap you like distotion" routine bad sceince.I suspect you like me don't mean that. I am as guilty as any of doing this.
The little I know is that a broken thing is a worse thing. Much of what we do is subtly broken. Class B , digital. When at least 0 and maximum are correct there is a chance we will forgive the distortion. Music itself is very distorted ( see it on the scope ). Oxford Townhall some of the worse distortion I ever heard.
I am very unhappy with the conjecture that distortion we "see " in amplifiers is in anyway true of humans processing music. There was a conjecture water on Earth came from comets. It now seems less likely. Up to a few weeks ago it was mostly stated as fact.
I suspect what people who cling to the distortion model are saying is . I have heard nice sounds. I have no idea why they are nice. I will not abandon the little I know to have a sound like that. Also at least the sceince of what they own is OK and it is them who might be failing the equipemet? Kings new suit ?
I don't mean to be rude saying this. I just find the " sorry chap you like distotion" routine bad sceince.I suspect you like me don't mean that. I am as guilty as any of doing this.
The little I know is that a broken thing is a worse thing. Much of what we do is subtly broken. Class B , digital. When at least 0 and maximum are correct there is a chance we will forgive the distortion. Music itself is very distorted ( see it on the scope ). Oxford Townhall some of the worse distortion I ever heard.
Books are books. I said to a German gentlemen " if it's written then it is true " ? He looked confused and said yes. I will never know what he really was saying. I had a horible feeling he was happy to accept that.
One thing I strongly say to people is always say this " as best we know ". That's fine.
At the pub last night we were talking about how good an 12 inch Eminence 12Lta PA driver sounds when EQ'ed on an open baffle ( a very special baffle at that ). Very much like $4000 speakers. The likely frequency range is 50 to 12kHz. The mid to top is by a nasty looking cone tweeter as in $3 speakers. The conjectur was a small part of the drive units maximum range of movement was being used. Phase shift limited to the mechanics and not the crossover. A device made optimum for voice reproduction. This discussion started with Lockwood cabinets and how T&S makes no sense of them. Tannoy was discussed and 12Lta as a poormans Tannoy. The point I am making is low cost and high performance needs most of all a very open mind.
Another conjecture. Humans are very good at coping with phase shift. However it causes fatigue. There is no evidence this is happening so how would we know. Most likely we stop listening and watch TV.
One thing I strongly say to people is always say this " as best we know ". That's fine.
At the pub last night we were talking about how good an 12 inch Eminence 12Lta PA driver sounds when EQ'ed on an open baffle ( a very special baffle at that ). Very much like $4000 speakers. The likely frequency range is 50 to 12kHz. The mid to top is by a nasty looking cone tweeter as in $3 speakers. The conjectur was a small part of the drive units maximum range of movement was being used. Phase shift limited to the mechanics and not the crossover. A device made optimum for voice reproduction. This discussion started with Lockwood cabinets and how T&S makes no sense of them. Tannoy was discussed and 12Lta as a poormans Tannoy. The point I am making is low cost and high performance needs most of all a very open mind.
Another conjecture. Humans are very good at coping with phase shift. However it causes fatigue. There is no evidence this is happening so how would we know. Most likely we stop listening and watch TV.
Some soundfiles then.
I've made 2 soundfiles. One is just a sine with some amplitude modulation. The other has harmonics added at -20dB of the root note. Both files are the same RMS level and are the same length.
Feel free to analyse the files and let me know witch sounds louder.
I've made 2 soundfiles. One is just a sine with some amplitude modulation. The other has harmonics added at -20dB of the root note. Both files are the same RMS level and are the same length.
Feel free to analyse the files and let me know witch sounds louder.
I will give it a try. Visual illussion are even more powerful.
Returning to turntables. Direct drive motors do give zest to things. Not what they do, what the others don't which includes LP12. As someone said LP12 sounds like a slighly drunk prossional giving a stage act. So good you can hardly notice until someone does it better. He and I both have LP12's.
1910 78's are interesting. In theory nothing is recorded that could be called music. Some are the most powerful recordings ever made. The main reason it was sugested to me was that they were not corrupted by listening to others perform via an apperatus . Many from that time retained that.
Returning to turntables. Direct drive motors do give zest to things. Not what they do, what the others don't which includes LP12. As someone said LP12 sounds like a slighly drunk prossional giving a stage act. So good you can hardly notice until someone does it better. He and I both have LP12's.
1910 78's are interesting. In theory nothing is recorded that could be called music. Some are the most powerful recordings ever made. The main reason it was sugested to me was that they were not corrupted by listening to others perform via an apperatus . Many from that time retained that.
It isn't bad science as both proper tests and anecdotes suggest that it is true (for at least some people). It may, however, be considered bad manners to say so.nigel pearson said:
AudioLapDance said:
I can't say but i remember listening to versions of several recordings having different noise levels once at an acoustics congress.
That noise level was not always audible in a conscious manner, but to my ears could have a slightly pleasing effect (was an unsighted demo using headphones) on some material:
There was especially a recording with wind instruments (flutes) which sounded a bit different to me, so i tended to give it "slightly better marks" than the version with low noise level. Usually i prefered the version with lower noise level.
"Noise" and "rumble" may affect the auditve impression, even in a different manner than distortion may do.
"Noise" and "rumble" may also affect the way amplifiers and loudspeakers act at very low levels, as the systems are permanently moved away from their "zero" or "resting" position.
Maybe this can affect some system's performance at very low levels: A bit "esoteric" idea, i know.
Last edited:
The difference is probably in the mastering. Since CDs are usually remastered (which , for the last 20 years or so usually means a lot more peak limiting/compression ) they will sound different. There's no magic in LPs. LPs don't "sound better", but the original source material might.
What I haven't done for ages is CD from LP. I never trusted CDR. I must see if friends have good 16 bit ( or better ) to try. I heard SACD against an analogue mastertape. The very famous LA engineer was rather hurt when I said it sounded like a tribute band. When we cut it at 33 1/3 it sounded closer ( Scully ) . Microgroove 78 was nearly identical. I have to say the Sony SACD was to me no better than MP3. I rather like MP3 , on reflection MP3 is better. Like this cheaper turntable it gets the qulaities real life and 1910 78's get right. They move me to tears. More is far less? Perhaps more has more timing errors. Like very good undercooked food. It just needed finishing.
I think it is too easy to forget that hi fi has no purpose outside of pleasing us. It is not a time keeping machine to sail to the Indies. It is not a heart monitor. It is to please. when I see scinece fiction it has people eating pills instead of meals. Should we like hi fi because it is the correct nutrition or similar? Like a paintings it is our choiice. Some here will suffer dreadful sound as the first test is secured. That is it has a perfect set of measurements. Oxford Townhall doesn't. Sorry guys how am I to judge. I only know music, the rest I only know a little of and when I learnt more I didn't like the sound more.
BTW. My friend Martin from DGG thinks DGG mastertapes sound more like LP. He says CD is flat presentation. He owns a TD124 and ELS57's .
I think it is too easy to forget that hi fi has no purpose outside of pleasing us. It is not a time keeping machine to sail to the Indies. It is not a heart monitor. It is to please. when I see scinece fiction it has people eating pills instead of meals. Should we like hi fi because it is the correct nutrition or similar? Like a paintings it is our choiice. Some here will suffer dreadful sound as the first test is secured. That is it has a perfect set of measurements. Oxford Townhall doesn't. Sorry guys how am I to judge. I only know music, the rest I only know a little of and when I learnt more I didn't like the sound more.
BTW. My friend Martin from DGG thinks DGG mastertapes sound more like LP. He says CD is flat presentation. He owns a TD124 and ELS57's .
BTW. It is possible to have very low distortion and still have these qualities. One amp I built was excatly that. I suspect the very low distortion was helping. There were amps of the 1970's that would better it except they sound awful. Others thought the same and found out why. A classic example was a 170 watt Sony amp that managed 2 watts dynamically into 1 ohm. NAD 3020 192 watts. Guess what , the NAD sounded better! NAD only claimed 20 watts. I have heard that Sony. It was awful. Like a swimming pool with too much bleach.
Because limited bandwidth + added harmonic distortion.
That's the way Naim and Linn made their systems >>> PRAT.
That's the way Naim and Linn made their systems >>> PRAT.
Happy Christmas etcetera.
I don't think so. Surely you don't beleive that. There is no great distortion when Naim The bandwidth was larger than many of it's day . Marantz Model 9 plus Quad ESL 57's can eat them for brakefast on PRAT. I made myself a beef stew yesterday. It was bland. Highly nutitious no doubt. If I had used some more time it would have been better. I made it with the very best things. The food for today came first and seems to be OK. The stew was to feed me mostly. I doubt many hi fi's bought with a spec sheet will even do that.
Naim did something many here do not seem confident to do. They took a very simple design and listened to all the choices they had. Unlike my stew they gave it time. All of the Naim amps were mostly the same. Mainly the power supplies were different. Now guys if that is bandwidth limiting I best go be a cook. Better not on second thoughts. At least with cooking I know others are better than me.
I still for the moment have an LP12. Back in the loft soon. It is the worst thing ever on PRAT that claimed otherwise ( The DD JVC much better even if it is gritty ) . LP12 is like listening to a jelly. TD145 is worse but is not pretending anything, I have both with DL110 to compare as a Christmas experiment. They sound remarkably different considering nearly all the parts looks generic. TD145 is standard 1970's and that's fine. LP12 has a broader sound stage. It still wobbles like a jelly. Kings new suit guys.
There is an attempt at balanced harmonics in NAP250. It doesn't raise the distortion as a statisitic ( see LTP ) . It orders it. Douglas Self would see that as daft. Jean Hiraga maybe not. Naim didn't get it perfect. Still a bit more 3rd. Quad 303 is perfect in that respect. Quad 303 is also a very low distrotion amp. I have seen someone else say single transistor input to be beter. Maybe the Quad is a good example. I doubt if any on the planet ( none ) would hear that distortion. They might hear PSU, bandwidth, power reserve and current limiting. The Quad could be made into a remarkable modern design. With OB spakers of 100 dB 1 watt it has stunning dynamics. I suspect 99% of people who could read this would have no idea and have to eat humble pie. Bandwidth ios weird. The Hypex has a very limited bandwidth and yet is OK. A piano is not right if the HF bandwdth is limited as the Hypex. Perhaps this is what this tread started with? A 12 inch driver on piano in free air can sound very good. A voice will not. That baffled me if you will allow. The piano has bass and the voice not. Actually it is slightly the other way.
One thing learnt at DIY Audio is ideas once created stick like glue. People who have great sucess with hi fi know these things and also know how improtant they are ( John Curl ? ) . My analogy is hi fi design can be like giving antibiotics for every illness. Sometimes even when badly wrong it is right ( ulcers ). Mostly with a little commonsense it is wrong. Part of that is remember your source material was never aimed at hi fi. If you don't choose your bandwidth you make a very stupid mistake ( it's not 80 or 200 kHz, more likely 97.5 or whatever ) . You will need very good test gear as ears will not do it all. Worse still the test gear is hard to use ( if not you aren't doing it right ) . You will design good PSU's because of it. What makes measuremenrs hard makes listening hard. That isn't the measurement. It is being sure the measurement is correct. In 1947 the very young D T N Williamson said about this. Most people didn't get it. If you every hear a correct Williamson they are dry and detailed. Nothing suggests valves except depth. The Marantz was a linear devellopement of that design ( Sid said so ). The Model 9 I liked used a LM317 as ripple rejection.
Came on line for Yorkshire pudding recipe. Same as French Crepe, should I use goose fat ? Happy Christmas all. Your are 100 % right about what you say as long as you did listen.
I don't think so. Surely you don't beleive that. There is no great distortion when Naim The bandwidth was larger than many of it's day . Marantz Model 9 plus Quad ESL 57's can eat them for brakefast on PRAT. I made myself a beef stew yesterday. It was bland. Highly nutitious no doubt. If I had used some more time it would have been better. I made it with the very best things. The food for today came first and seems to be OK. The stew was to feed me mostly. I doubt many hi fi's bought with a spec sheet will even do that.
Naim did something many here do not seem confident to do. They took a very simple design and listened to all the choices they had. Unlike my stew they gave it time. All of the Naim amps were mostly the same. Mainly the power supplies were different. Now guys if that is bandwidth limiting I best go be a cook. Better not on second thoughts. At least with cooking I know others are better than me.
I still for the moment have an LP12. Back in the loft soon. It is the worst thing ever on PRAT that claimed otherwise ( The DD JVC much better even if it is gritty ) . LP12 is like listening to a jelly. TD145 is worse but is not pretending anything, I have both with DL110 to compare as a Christmas experiment. They sound remarkably different considering nearly all the parts looks generic. TD145 is standard 1970's and that's fine. LP12 has a broader sound stage. It still wobbles like a jelly. Kings new suit guys.
There is an attempt at balanced harmonics in NAP250. It doesn't raise the distortion as a statisitic ( see LTP ) . It orders it. Douglas Self would see that as daft. Jean Hiraga maybe not. Naim didn't get it perfect. Still a bit more 3rd. Quad 303 is perfect in that respect. Quad 303 is also a very low distrotion amp. I have seen someone else say single transistor input to be beter. Maybe the Quad is a good example. I doubt if any on the planet ( none ) would hear that distortion. They might hear PSU, bandwidth, power reserve and current limiting. The Quad could be made into a remarkable modern design. With OB spakers of 100 dB 1 watt it has stunning dynamics. I suspect 99% of people who could read this would have no idea and have to eat humble pie. Bandwidth ios weird. The Hypex has a very limited bandwidth and yet is OK. A piano is not right if the HF bandwdth is limited as the Hypex. Perhaps this is what this tread started with? A 12 inch driver on piano in free air can sound very good. A voice will not. That baffled me if you will allow. The piano has bass and the voice not. Actually it is slightly the other way.
One thing learnt at DIY Audio is ideas once created stick like glue. People who have great sucess with hi fi know these things and also know how improtant they are ( John Curl ? ) . My analogy is hi fi design can be like giving antibiotics for every illness. Sometimes even when badly wrong it is right ( ulcers ). Mostly with a little commonsense it is wrong. Part of that is remember your source material was never aimed at hi fi. If you don't choose your bandwidth you make a very stupid mistake ( it's not 80 or 200 kHz, more likely 97.5 or whatever ) . You will need very good test gear as ears will not do it all. Worse still the test gear is hard to use ( if not you aren't doing it right ) . You will design good PSU's because of it. What makes measuremenrs hard makes listening hard. That isn't the measurement. It is being sure the measurement is correct. In 1947 the very young D T N Williamson said about this. Most people didn't get it. If you every hear a correct Williamson they are dry and detailed. Nothing suggests valves except depth. The Marantz was a linear devellopement of that design ( Sid said so ). The Model 9 I liked used a LM317 as ripple rejection.
Came on line for Yorkshire pudding recipe. Same as French Crepe, should I use goose fat ? Happy Christmas all. Your are 100 % right about what you say as long as you did listen.
You are conflating two different issues.nigel pearson said:
"Should we like hi-fi?" A personal choice. Some like hi-fi; some do not. It is not a moral issue.
"Should we call something hi-fi if it is not the correct "nutrition?" i.e. it does not accurately reproduce the sound (within reasonable constraints such as state-of-the-art, cost, room size etc.). Calling something A when it is in fact B is not a personal choice, but a matter of truth.
'Hi-fi' means something: high fidelity. It does not mean "I like it"; it does not mean "You should like it too".
I agree with the poster Tattoo. Vinyl adds distortion particularly if the cartridge alignment is bad. Many years ago we were listening to a Linn Sondek LP12 + Ittok (is that the correct spelling) arm and expensive cartridge and thought that sounds a bit odd. The 'Hi-Fi' dealer had aligned the cartridge so badly it make a big difference to the distortion.
If you like the sound that's good. But I think that the system including LP mastering is likely to sound good on certain albums but possibly annoying on others.
If you like the sound that's good. But I think that the system including LP mastering is likely to sound good on certain albums but possibly annoying on others.
Point taken . For no money we can have better. I just proved this. 3 hours calculation and 10 mins work. I recently bought a DL 110 for my ancient Quad 33/303. 1.6 mV into 2 mV sensetivity. This seems bliss as the Quad is marginal on overload.
The Quad circuit diagram is very hard to read. Instead I put the PU board in and read the resistors to earth via the PCB back. Now it is simple. R105/106 and R 107/8 set the gain. The board taps the resistors ( M1/2 ). They must stay as total 690R. By adding 1K to the 220R ( 180 R . R107/8) and making R105/6 510 R I have the right gain to clip at typical 8 on the dial. It was 11 before ( 10 is max ) .
This is an interesting mod. Both right and wrong. The music is now drier and mildly pinched. However it is mostly better. Stangely Naim like ( !? ). I suspect as mad as it would be 200 R and 490 R would be perfect. On paper it seems unlikely this would do anything. Paper isn't the truth of it. The Quad is not a poor design. On the other hand it needs very little to make it sound very odd. I have read plenty about it over the years so know most of it's little problems. I have to say this PU with this care can make the 33 almost sound high end. Remember the DL 110 will go above 45 kHz. The Quad is not happy if it is asked to reproduce that and cope with extra gain. Hi fi choice put the overload margin as 0dB 20 kHz I seem to remember. Although music won't be a problem HF resonance might. As far as I know the 33 + DL 110 shows no obvious defect. My mod suggests onset.
As Quad was always a benchmark of commonsense I hope using it as an example will say even the better products need care.
Anyone who wants to use the PU input of the 33 for CD all you need do is find the Quad mod sheet. I heard a 33 with op amps conversion. That was not my cup of tea.
Even my Lyra might work. 700 uV. That would need. 100R and 590 R. Someone has made the 33 over to 47K input. The Lyra is OK with that if the preamp is. It is OK with 22R also. Hardly different if the input stage is OK. Some will talk of ideal loading. Seems exagerated to me with modern MC's. Exact gain is not. BTW, hiss is still excellent. I guess it to be 75 dB.
The Quad circuit diagram is very hard to read. Instead I put the PU board in and read the resistors to earth via the PCB back. Now it is simple. R105/106 and R 107/8 set the gain. The board taps the resistors ( M1/2 ). They must stay as total 690R. By adding 1K to the 220R ( 180 R . R107/8) and making R105/6 510 R I have the right gain to clip at typical 8 on the dial. It was 11 before ( 10 is max ) .
This is an interesting mod. Both right and wrong. The music is now drier and mildly pinched. However it is mostly better. Stangely Naim like ( !? ). I suspect as mad as it would be 200 R and 490 R would be perfect. On paper it seems unlikely this would do anything. Paper isn't the truth of it. The Quad is not a poor design. On the other hand it needs very little to make it sound very odd. I have read plenty about it over the years so know most of it's little problems. I have to say this PU with this care can make the 33 almost sound high end. Remember the DL 110 will go above 45 kHz. The Quad is not happy if it is asked to reproduce that and cope with extra gain. Hi fi choice put the overload margin as 0dB 20 kHz I seem to remember. Although music won't be a problem HF resonance might. As far as I know the 33 + DL 110 shows no obvious defect. My mod suggests onset.
As Quad was always a benchmark of commonsense I hope using it as an example will say even the better products need care.
Anyone who wants to use the PU input of the 33 for CD all you need do is find the Quad mod sheet. I heard a 33 with op amps conversion. That was not my cup of tea.
Even my Lyra might work. 700 uV. That would need. 100R and 590 R. Someone has made the 33 over to 47K input. The Lyra is OK with that if the preamp is. It is OK with 22R also. Hardly different if the input stage is OK. Some will talk of ideal loading. Seems exagerated to me with modern MC's. Exact gain is not. BTW, hiss is still excellent. I guess it to be 75 dB.
I'm sure most of us here that are playing records know how to align a cartridge, and would "speak up" if things were that far out of alignment.
jeff
- Status
- Not open for further replies.