Quite Myhrrhleine, that is one reason why we add a balance control. What is annoying is to have the balance drift with different volume settings on the vol control, but that is another issue, entirely.
Where are not going to ramble about that old technology, are we? Technically, there is so much poor in comparison to digital stuff (starts at noise, distortion, equalization, cross talk and goes over to tricks that have to be used in mastering like mono bass, not too large channel separation, bass boost to avoid mistracking in addition to inherent technology limitations like loss of high frequencies for inner tracks and poor separation between neighbouring grooves) that I won't get into that.
Still love it, though.
Have fun, Hannes
Don't care how old the technology mayb e, it still can sound FAR better than the best digital. Just more ease, more naturalness.
Regards, Allen
Regards, Allen
Hm. Earlier i sold some Koetsus, but good old Sugano San NEVER supplied any spec. sheet or something similar. Just the Tracking weight the importer recommended apx. 2,2 upt 2,5 gramm when i asked him.
Beside that, those Koetsu Cartridges i had in my hands were anything than small tolerances. I had 2 pcs of the Urushi ( 5'000 $) which i gave back, because they were really bad in L/R level comparison (more than 2, 5dBs) when measured. It was also visible that the cantilever was wrong in angle when brandnew out of the box.
We get free exchange without any discussion!
Koetsus showed often trackability problems when measured,but in the listening tests they worked usually ok with most records. (Kisekis were not better
)We used some MC prepreamps ( McKinnies) designed by JC.
The other thing with the RIAA tolerances is, with old classic records there are different curves, and there exist some very expensive products you can compensate this with two knobs.
Looking at frequency response of many modern mc cartridges, they are anything than linear, especially in the 20 Khz range they have a response up to 12 db plus (measured), so the measure tolerance is not the problem.
The loading by resistors often make them sounding different, but i could hardly measure difference. Some cartridges are unimpressed by load, other sensitive. For me 100 Ohms works usually, it depends somehow with the mass of the arm/cartridge combo, the heavy things are not so sensible.
Just my 2 cents.
Hm. Earlier i sold some Koetsus, but good old Sugano San NEVER supplied any spec. sheet or something similar.
Beside that, those Koetsu Cartridges i had in my hands were anything than small tolerances. I had 2 pcs of the Urushi ( 5'000 $) which i gave back, because they were really bad in L/R level comparison (more than 2, 5dBs) when measured. It was also visible that the cantilever was wrong in angle when brandnew out of the box.
Koetsus showed often trackability problems when measured,but in the listening tests they worked usually ok with most records. (Kisekis were not better
Looking at frequency response of many modern mc cartridges, they are anything than linear, especially in the 20 Khz range they have a response up to 12 db plus (measured), so the measure tolerance is not the problem.
My God, and some still claim that 0.1dB matching is required/audible.
The Koetsu specs are now posted by various distributors: Koetsu Phono Cartridges. Could these specs be fakes?
So a customer may complain about the phono stage while using one of those expensive shitty cartridges. Nice place to do business.
Groove T, thanks for the input.
It is the same old rationalization: Why bother to make better products, when the recordings are so bad in the first place? OR in this case, why make a first class phono preamp with accurate EQ for other people, when each cartridge will be different anyway? Or we might say, why build fancy sports cars, when the roads are usually congested? Etc, etc. Well, we have to start, somewhere.
PS The McKinnee preamp was indeed partially my design, as Reza, the company owner, worked with me as a tech in Switzerland in 1974-1976. I gave him the SCP1 circuit, back in the mid 80's, to make. He changed the board layout and power supply extensively, but he went on to make his real money importing Krell, etc. to Switzerland. Now he is very wealthy through this sort of business activity. That's where the money is, not in design, but being a middleman for a popular activity.
It is the same old rationalization: Why bother to make better products, when the recordings are so bad in the first place? OR in this case, why make a first class phono preamp with accurate EQ for other people, when each cartridge will be different anyway? Or we might say, why build fancy sports cars, when the roads are usually congested? Etc, etc. Well, we have to start, somewhere.
PS The McKinnee preamp was indeed partially my design, as Reza, the company owner, worked with me as a tech in Switzerland in 1974-1976. I gave him the SCP1 circuit, back in the mid 80's, to make. He changed the board layout and power supply extensively, but he went on to make his real money importing Krell, etc. to Switzerland. Now he is very wealthy through this sort of business activity. That's where the money is, not in design, but being a middleman for a popular activity.
Ohhhhhh, i worked for reza in the mid 80s as his only technician.
I had to match 1000's of fets and we have been trying to make the SPC 1 working, but hf-ringing problems with board layout ( since then i now how critical your designs are, but if they work, they do it very good).
Then we had some other problems to fix with krell, apogee and so on and put the SPC onto the side.
Astonishing is that those 25 year mc Kinnie RO 3 still sound very good compared with other actual brands. Im also familiar with the vendetta😎
Anyway, i think its a good thing have a proper phono and/or linestage with good specs , this makes it easier to detect what the real thing is or were the problem is.
@syn8
maybe koetsu now present really spec and also better constant buidling quality, since one of sugano san's many son's lead the company.
But hardly i believe that an MC can do a frequency range up to 100kHz like they say . It would be better they would present trackability data's instead of this incredible things.
But what really drives me crazy, i hade two different phonostage at home to compare the sound. Both measured more or less the same (+/- o,25 dB , but one of them i did not hear many bassnotes, no! deep bass in the 30 Hz area, but dynamics and natural timbres of instruments and voices were much better. Same loading with resistors, same cables and so on. 😕
As a technician it trust data, but for music to my ears.
If measurings are really bad, so it hardly sounds good, but if values and data are on comparable level, the ear counts.
my other 2 cents
Interesting Groove T. Guess who bought the remaining 2SK146-73 combinations? Me, of course. Reza also tried to 'sell' me his remaining stock of components, but I politely declined. Did you buy any?
No, i did not, since im no DIY guy, im a hifidealer since 20 years now .
And his pricepolicy for old products is a little bit special.
Personally i spend a lot of money for audiogear at home, so this is not the point.
And his pricepolicy for old products is a little bit special.
Personally i spend a lot of money for audiogear at home, so this is not the point.
Hi EDDELAURE
If you see figure 3 in your link, there is an equalization, where the 75 us roll off is obtained passively. The two parts (750 ohm, and 100 nF) are just the same as in Vendetta, but in Figure 3 those are in line, instead of parallel. Just as I supposed. I do not really understand, why does it work in that design.
Hi aszoke,
in the figure 3, the opamp U1 is a VOLTAGE AMPLIFIER and it has low output impedance. It works like a voltage source for that low pass network. See "Thevenin´s theorem ".
On the Vendetta, the first stage is a TRASNCONDUCTANCE AMPLIFIER and it has high output impedance without load. So, it works like a current source for that load ( 750R // 100nF ).
See "Norton´s theorem ".
regards
eD
Thanks eD. It's clear now.
I'm not professional, and I've no any experience in such designs, but it seems to me, that it is not a simple put it together, and works amplifier, since if we want correct RIAA equalization, then the output impedance should be set up correctly. It can take some time to set it up in within 1%. Or many parts are needed to select the correct one. Or am I wrong again?
This is a slightly different approach. The output of the amplifier is CURRENT and by definition, a high impedance. It works with just 2 parts, i.e. .1uf and 750 ohms.
Hi aszoke,
we can get the same result with various combinations of R//C at output, since the corner frequency be equal 2120Hz. But don´t forget the output resistor R sets the gain of the stage before the capacitor reactance does some effect . This is the flat frequency region.
regards
eD
Hi eD,
I'm not totally sure in myself, but as I calculated, the output impedance must be rather high, to get correct Riaa equalization. For example, if it is 75k, the error about 0.07 dB in the high frequencies, and as the output impedace decreases, the error increases. Maybe some adjustment can be made changing the R and C values, but the 750 ohm and 100 nF seem to me the ideal values. And in this case you will loose 99% of the amplification. Maybe I did some error in calculation?
It is also interesting, that the 100 nF capacitor seems to me rather demanding load. At least as I have read previously. It is really interesting for me, that it does not cause any problems in sound quality.
Thanks,
Attila