My question was very logical, but forum members ignored it.
I don't think it was ignored, but that nobody who saw your question could answer it...
There hasn't been an Ono or Xono clone board in years, and I think only one member who has been following this thread has built an Ono, and I haven't seen him post in quite some time.
I recently looked at the circuit of the Ono, and it was quite similar to the Pearl II. I may be wrong, and someone else can chime in, but to me it seemed similar.
Edit: Here's the circuit I saw:
http://rstaudio.de/Xono/ono_en.html
Edit: Here's the circuit I saw:
http://rstaudio.de/Xono/ono_en.html
Last edited:
another possibility is to target your question to the designer of all of them - wayne at passlabs
mlloyd1
mlloyd1
My question was very logical, but forum members ignored it. I have always wished to know the motivation of backward steps in DIY audio and, as in a old folk saying, started to ride donkey instead of horse.
Well the Ono and Xono were not DIY projects. They were just cloned from service manuals. The Pearls are DIY and simpler to build not really a step backwards. These are less flexible than the commercial offerings in regard to loading balanced, outputs, drive capability etc. The perfomance also depends on the power supply and who is building it. A good build comes pretty close to an Xono but remember it has been discontinued for a few years and we have moved on. You can put together quite a good sounding system off of DIY if you have the time.
thanks wayne!
also, for the religious warriors who care about such things, -) ) the pearls use passive eq, the onos use active eq.
never built/heard pearls, but heard both onos and they sounded sweet.
haven't heard the new ones (xp-xx) either but i'm afraid to; might want one ...
mlloyd1
also, for the religious warriors who care about such things, -) ) the pearls use passive eq, the onos use active eq.
never built/heard pearls, but heard both onos and they sounded sweet.
haven't heard the new ones (xp-xx) either but i'm afraid to; might want one ...
mlloyd1
ride donkey instead of horse
Building is half the fun, doesn't have to be better all the time.
There's always something superior, but not at entry level, personally i don't see the point of building a $5K phono stage for a 500 dollar turntable.
(got yourself a set of Dragan's boards, right ?)
Just a silly question here but do most folks always solder parts on the underneath side of the board?
It would seem easier to solder most of the resistors from the top than from the bottom side of the board but I just wanted some other folk’s opinions on this. Thanks.
James
It would seem easier to solder most of the resistors from the top than from the bottom side of the board but I just wanted some other folk’s opinions on this. Thanks.
James
buy that
My wet dream is a B&W Nautilus with zebra stripes (but i suspect the cabinet maker will jump out of the window halfway).
Thank you very much for your reply. At least two of the Pearl Two builders had also built outstanding version of Ono/Xono. I only wished to know sonic differences between them.Well the Ono and Xono were not DIY projects. They were just cloned from service manuals. The Pearls are DIY and simpler to build not really a step backwards. These are less flexible than the commercial offerings in regard to loading balanced, outputs, drive capability etc. The perfomance also depends on the power supply and who is building it. A good build comes pretty close to an Xono but remember it has been discontinued for a few years and we have moved on. You can put together quite a good sounding system off of DIY if you have the time.
Having watched high res. photos of your XP-25 I saw that you went on complementary J-fets path instead of single ended designs. I also prefer fully complementary approach by Erno Borbely.
I have just finished assembly and testing of Xono PCB which I etched myself two years ago. It is only modular Xono I have ever seen, and practical to be combined with other modules of your choice. I wish to compare it with my Borbely phono stage , I will even use the same power supply all-Fet regulators.
Last edited:
on complementary J-fets path instead of single ended designs.
Bit more than just that.
http://hifi-guide.hosting3.activecore.net/user/graphics/products/106/1387/5718_orig.jpg?ver=7
Siberia
The cartridges I have tried are the Accuphase AC 2 at .17mv, Fidelity Research FR-3f at .14 mv on the highest gain setting. My current and best MC is the Sao Win Jewel at I "think" is somewhere around .40 mv but is a guess.
I might even decrease the gain a little for that one considering my Audible Illusions 3a has a healthy line stage output
Regards
David
The cartridges I have tried are the Accuphase AC 2 at .17mv, Fidelity Research FR-3f at .14 mv on the highest gain setting. My current and best MC is the Sao Win Jewel at I "think" is somewhere around .40 mv but is a guess.
I might even decrease the gain a little for that one considering my Audible Illusions 3a has a healthy line stage output
Regards
David
What is the lowest cartridge output recommendable for Pearl II? Tea-Bag found Denon 103R a bit too low, for example. It might be system dependant, but is there a value that would leave me on a safe side.
That is always going to be system dependent. If you have, say, 40db of gain in your preamp, or a power amp with .5v input to full output, you would find that even the lowest output cartridge would be fine.
But in reality it's going to come down to how much gain your preamp has. If you are using a buffer, you might need more gain with a really low output cart.
I see, I've should have stated that my "preamp" is DCB1, a 1 unity gain buffer power amp with 775mV input sensitivity.
You should need 63dB for a 0.25mV cart with your setup or 60dB and a 0.4-0.5mV cart. Input noise under 1nVrtHz.
- Home
- Amplifiers
- Pass Labs
- Pearl Two