• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

New Elac Alchemy PPA-2 Phono Preamp - Any Users?

I have the PPA-2 for almost a year now! My friend Jim Clark sent it to me for a review.

I love this phono stage, I quickly removed the tube phono stage I was using. Many features, I dialed my MC cartridge to 30 ohms, I have a P-Mount Technics 310MC cartridge on my Technics SL-7 turntable.

It even has a rumble filter for when you need one.
I think Peter Madnick thought of everything when designing this unit!
 
I did not consider that, I exclusively use Mc cartridges! I will pass that info onto the person I did my review for! Thanks for pointing that out!
 
jetstream said:
Except for MM capacitance.
Click to expand...

I haven't missed that feature - yet. I have used a pretty wide range of MM/MI cartridges with it and they all sound just fine, so it doesn't seem to be an issue with this design. It does especially good with LOMC. I have not thought about upgrading any further since I purchased the PPA-2. There is no need to. The only complaint I have is that the adjustment for the input impedance is a little fiddly. Not really an issue though with the front panel display. This allows very precise adjustment. There are separate adjustments for phono 1 and phono 2 so you don't have to adjust every time you switch inputs. It also saves all the other settings for each input. Really nice. Highly recommended.
 
I have talked to the person I did my review for, he will check with ELAC, he was under impression you could change loading for mm cartridges too! When I hear I’ll post an update!
 
How does the PPA-2 handle clicks and pops on records? I've the impression from reading articles that a SS phono stage doesn't handle clicks and pops as well as a tube phono stage
 
elrod said:
How does the PPA-2 handle clicks and pops on records? I've the impression from reading articles that a SS phono stage doesn't handle clicks and pops as well as a tube phono stage
Click to expand...

That's a new one on me. I have not had any issues with clicks and pops using my PPA-2.
 
I have a couple of pretty good SS phono stages. Clicks and pops can be more abrupt, this is true. But the better stylus profiles can mitigate this, to some extent. I have no real preference for SS or tubes, they do the same job, just differently. I've been looking at the ELAC myself...
 
justjed2 said:
I have a couple of pretty good SS phono stages. Clicks and pops can be more abrupt, this is true. But the better stylus profiles can mitigate this, to some extent. I have no real preference for SS or tubes, they do the same job, just differently. I've been looking at the ELAC myself...
Click to expand...

The only reason that there could be any truth to that statement is if the click or pop drives the phono stage into saturation. Tubes and transistors behave differently when driven into saturation. Otherwise, tube or SS should handle this exactly the same way. I would submit to you that if a click or pop is driving a phono stage into saturation, it is a severely damaged record. I would worry more about my stylus being damaged at that point.
 
I have a SS outboard phono pre feeding into a tube-hybrid pre-amp. The tubes seem to round off the sharp edges of clicks and pops in the signal, in a rather pleasant way. The phono stage in my SS pre-amp seems to be a touch louder on clicks and pops, but with a slightly faster, more abrupt response that is over a touch quicker. And, as I mentioned, the more exotic stylus profiles can reduce this noticeably. Bonded elliptical styli, in my system, are generally louder on surface imperfections, and the slightly heavier cantilevers on my carts react slower, extending the audible impulse of the pop or click just a bit.
 
I read someplace that systems with zero negative feedback (usually tubes) are quieter as far as clicks and pops than designs with negative feedback (predominately SS) because SS pre's have some sort of time delay due to circuity design that can cause clicks and pops to be more noticeable. But tubes generally have higher noise floor than SS, so it's a little bit of picking your poison

Thank you for your thought!
 
It's all good, as long as you like what you're hearing. I've built some of the highest tech electronics on the planet, but that's my job. Audio is my hobby, and I don't want it to be like my job. Plus, I am not a technician, so I don't care much WHY something sounds the way it sounds, as long as it sounds good.
 
I've been using a ELAC PPA-2 for about? 6 months now. I also own and use a pair of the Parasound JC-3 jr preamps. Most of the time I have either three or four turntables hooked into my system at any one time -thus multiple preamps. I also own a couple of the iFi iPhonos ,Lounge Audio LCR-III, a custom MM phono preamp made by a friend (very quiet), a Schiit Mani (least favorite so far) , owned and sold off the Parasound XRM ( IMHO nice but not as pleasant as most of the others listed above), several ART DJ-Pre II (winner of cheapskate evil grin award) and a Hagerman Bugle 2 modded by a friend - might be the most pleasant MM phono of the bunch (rates a evil grin plus belly laugh from the audio cheapskate). So that's what I've got to compare to the ELAC PPA-2. Possibly the most relevant comparison is with the jC-3 jr (price n features) : They don't sound at all alike. Both have variable LOMC input loading - a feature that's also used on the Lounge Audio Copla I own and the Parasound XRM I sold. ELAC's approach to this is pretty smart - seperate adjustment pots for each channel and a built in DOM to measure this adjustment as you go. Agree with Michael Fremer -fiddly ( common issue with cheap DOM -reason I own a couple of Flukes) -but this allows ELAC to get around one of the essential quandaries of stereo preamps -stereo Pots are either expensive or inaccurate (and with time even expensive Pots may not age gracefully). ELAC can use a pair of good quality mono pots and ignore the tracking issue that bedevils stereo pots. Smart ! So -what do my ol nun handles hear differently when listening to the PPA-2 v. JC-3jr. I have a long term (many decades) preference for a more relaxed sound from phono preamps -am willing to accept some what less high frequency detail to get that. The JC-3 jr has both excellent detail (to my old n damaged ears) and still produces that immediate since of ease -relaxing into the music that I enjoy. John Curl did one heck of a job. The PPA-2 is definitely more detailed -but somehow avoids the hot n bright problem - no ringing - no glare-no tizz-but I am really impressed with what a Shure M97xE or a AT VM540ML does going thru the PPA-2 -in a good arm these deliver more information with grace and speed than most of my LOMC can produce. And the advantage of superior tracking that you have to pay a multiple of the retail of these MM's to get in a LOMC. I bought the PPA-2 based on Peter Madniks pretty impressive track record and I am not disappointed -the PPA- 2's a keeper.
 
The eMail I got from Peter said 47pF for MM (Fremer quotes 100pF) -remember it's pretty easy to add capacitance and thereby increase capacitance (cutting it no -not without getting inside with a soldering iron). I recently quit looking at dB Systems capacitance loading kits and bought one -then ordered two more- way too easy - proof yet again that if it's a good idea I can procrastinate to no benefit for decades.
 
Hello all, new member.

I've had mine for about 2 weeks and I love it. It's detailed without being harsh, throws a big soundstage, and allows you to dial in your load. It kicked an Ayre P-5xe to the curb.
 
rdesio said:
Hello all, new member.

I've had mine for about 2 weeks and I love it. It's detailed without being harsh, throws a big soundstage, and allows you to dial in your load. It kicked an Ayre P-5xe to the curb.
Click to expand...
Kind of hard to believe it being so much better than the Ayre, which is a pretty nice sounding phono preamp. Definitely different, the no feedback approach taken by Ayre results in a sound that some love, and others not so much, but I'm very much in the group that prefers no loop feedback designs. I'm using Conrad Johnson preamps, so have only heard the Ayre at a friends place, but that system sounds very nice. Have you had the Ayre a long time? What does the Elac do so much better for you?

Thanks, and welcome to the forum!
 
The Slider said:
Kind of hard to believe it being so much better than the Ayre, which is a pretty nice sounding phono preamp. Definitely different, the no feedback approach taken by Ayre results in a sound that some love, and others not so much, but I'm very much in the group that prefers no loop feedback designs. I'm using Conrad Johnson preamps, so have only heard the Ayre at a friends place, but that system sounds very nice. Have you had the Ayre a long time? What does the Elac do so much better for you?

Thanks, and welcome to the forum!
Click to expand...
Thanks. I don't really care about the implementation as long as it sounds good.

I've had the Ayre a long time. The harshness had been getting on my nerves for a long time. The PPA-2 has more detail with none of the glare. Proper cartridge loading goes a long way also. I have my cart loaded at 47 ohms which makes a big difference. It also throws a huge soundstage. Its dynamic as all get out. It's just better for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom