If so, then "best ever heard" cannot correspond to 'accurate and stable RIAA response' as that is unachievable without some C and R - but easily achievable without L.
Don't believe everything other people tell you - even if published in a magazine by a well-known journalist. Instead, get to understand circuits then you can decide for yourself rather than being misled by the idiosyncracies of others.
Don't believe everything other people tell you - even if published in a magazine by a well-known journalist. Instead, get to understand circuits then you can decide for yourself rather than being misled by the idiosyncracies of others.
You can find reviews stating similar things about many different kinds of audio components.
It's simply impossible to make an accurate phono stage without using precision resistors, though.
Inductors also have many shortcomings, just as capacitors do.
Last edited:
May I inquire as to your personal audio equipment list so as to put into perspective your comments?
As I originally mentioned, I started down this path on a recommendation of a personal friend. He has sold and installed several High End LCR designed phono stages (+$26,000). Some of these to customers with +$1,000,000 systems with unlimited funds. I can't imagine that the technology doesn't work and not work well since they can and have bought different stages prior.
Maybe if the budget does not allow for the best quality parts LCR topology does not work as well as conventional RC topology?
Depends on what you mean by "work as well." If you mean "low distortion, stable operation, low noise," no, it does not work as well, assuming one has taken care in the design in both cases. The difference may be small enough to be inaudible, but you'll still need to spend a LOT more to achieve anything close to the performance that you'll get from old fashioned Rs and Cs.
MC transformers generally are considered superior to active pre-preamplifiers. Inductors can be created to less than 1% accuracy. DC magnetization can also be avoided. I don't see why an LR solution would be worse than an RC solution (apart from space and sensitivity to external magnetic field). It is also an art to find the best capacitors for the equalization network, just like to find the best core for an inductor.
Hi,
I prefer the possible high fexibility that active stages allow with regard to cartridge/Input matching.
As i see it there are only two possible advantages for a MC transformer:
- galvanic isolation, hence no risk of leakage or base currents through the pickup coils
- very low noise, though that is no issue with a properly designed active stage
DF96 and others just asked why LR should be any better than RC, considered the fact that inductors are rather inferior in their parameters than Caps.
So far we just learned it must be better, because the devices cost more and ´someone´ has told so. 
We still wait to hear a factual reason.
jauu
Calvin
General prejudices are generally false.
I prefer the possible high fexibility that active stages allow with regard to cartridge/Input matching.
As i see it there are only two possible advantages for a MC transformer:
- galvanic isolation, hence no risk of leakage or base currents through the pickup coils
- very low noise, though that is no issue with a properly designed active stage
It´s just the other way round ..... the apologets of LR are asked to proove their claim of superiority against RC.
DF96 and others just asked why LR should be any better than RC, considered the fact that inductors are rather inferior in their parameters than Caps.
So far we just learned it must be better, because the devices cost more
and ´someone´ has told so. We still wait to hear a factual reason.
jauu
Calvin
I can't quite understand how knowledge of my audio setup is going to help you judge my competence in understanding and explaining audio circuit theory. Is there some correlation or causality I am unaware of?Coasttocoast said:
Sadly, the truth in science and engineering (audio is a branch of engineering, by the way) does not depend on the ability of someone to believe it. People with unlimited funds tend to be easy prey for others who would like to share some of those funds, and a good way of doing this is to sell them something which is different from what ordinary people use. They will assume (or have been told) that ordinary people would like to have this stuff, but simply can't afford it; in reality ordinary people know that the cheaper way of doing it is actually superior. As SY says, if you spend enough money on an LCR based phono system you might approach the quality more easily achievable with a much cheaper CR system. Inconvenient facts, I am afraid.
Size, cost, interference, component tolerance, temperature dependence, bandwidth. Is that enough reasons to avoid L when C will do?lcsaszar said:
I guess these days anything can be called 'art' - even searching on-line catalogues for ordinary electronic components.
Absolutely!
Let me reiterate that I started this thread looking for help with a schematic with specific parameters, as opposed to LCR vs RC. I also mentioned I have no electronic background and very minimal experience in audio altogether. So I have no axe to grind and no ability to back up any opinion.
That being said, if I was out looking for a new high performance sports car and I had never bought one before and I needed advice on how to outfit a Porsche 911 Carrera GTS, who whose advice would I take? Say a friend that had owned several Porsches and currently had one, or someone on an Internet forum with unknown car ownership history?
Now of course it could be said that an average person could outfit a VW and give the Porsche a run for its money. And that the Porsche buyer was just easy prey to a good salesman. But in the end the Porshe buyer is still driving a Porsche, it's not always about the specs on paper, sometimes it's also about the art!
Have you personally owned or auditioned the Ypsilon or another quality, well designed, LCR phono stage to give an actual review of the technology from personal experience? Hence my question as to your system.
Soooooo......... Back to the question at hand.
dunno if this one has been mentioned VinylSavor: Making of a D3a LCR RIAA Phono Preamp - Part 1 if you look at VinylSavor: D3a that should have all the L you would ever need.
edit: http://vinylsavor.blogspot.de/search/label/LCR RIAA is the link I should have sent. Apologies if this is a repost
The good news is you have all the fabrication skills to make this look great!
edit: http://vinylsavor.blogspot.de/search/label/LCR RIAA is the link I should have sent. Apologies if this is a repost
The good news is you have all the fabrication skills to make this look great!
Third option: someone with deep knowledge of sports car design and engineering. That's what you got here.
I feel a category error is looming. It is not doubted that some people prefer LCR phonos, just as some people prefer Porsches. My concern is electrical performance (where CR is best); your concern may be something else.Coasttocoast said:
A phono preamp has a reasonably well-defined engineering task, unlike an expensive car. Expensive cars sometimes fail badly in areas where ordinary cars succeed (such as reliability, fuel economy, safety). Expensive cars may excel at other things such as bird pulling or impressing friends or making a lot of noise, but when it comes to getting people reliably and efficiently from A to B they are unlikely to better a cheaper but well-engineered car.
If using L is a bad engineering choice for a phono preamp, then by definition any design which does so cannot be well-engineered. Bad design choices cannot lead to quality.
I note that so far nobody else has stepped forward to back up any opinion either, apart from those who agree with me that L is best avoided except where it is the appropriate technology.
Thanks for posting! Yes this is close to what I'm looking for, unfortunately he does not share the details as it is his current product for sale.
Beautiful work though.
Lots of doubts about the use of inductors in high-quality audio on this thread. But there seem to be many engineers who have successfully used inductors in low-amperage ways. I have personally used the Marchand Electronics XM46:
XM46 Passive Line Level Crossover Network, PLLXO, 24 dB/oct
It is very transparent.
XM46 Passive Line Level Crossover Network, PLLXO, 24 dB/oct
It is very transparent.
I can appreciate your dedication to principal!
So when you lay awake at night and dream of building the perfect phono stage, no budget, what comes to mind?
Can you provide the details and a schematic?
I have not found the 'perfect' phono stage yet. Probably because I don't have the budget. But there are at least 3 published on this forum or in Linear Audio I would like to build over time. Take a look at this http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/diya...oise-thoroughly-modern-tube-phono-preamp.html . Only for those who are happy with input transformers, but exceptional performance and you could show SY a thing or 2 about how to package things so they look nice.
If that is not enough glowing bottles there are some other designs being bounced around at the moment, but they are still in research phase and not what I would recommend for a first build.
If that is not enough glowing bottles there are some other designs being bounced around at the moment, but they are still in research phase and not what I would recommend for a first build.