• 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

Phono stage 'emotionalism'.

catman

catman

Addicted Member
Banned
G'day all, after using my TCC TC-750 exclusively for a week or so now, this morning I went back to my DIY ESP P06 and whilst it is better, the difference tonally is minimal except for one thing.

I have often spoken about the dynamic sound of the P06, well here is another one, 'emotionalism'. Listening to the same record, John Williams 'Rhapsody', listening to some of the guitar passages with the P06 were so beautiful that I was nearly brought to tears such was the emotional impact.

The TCC TC-750 simply didn't convey this sense of emotional involvement, not even once. Curious. :yes: I guess this is the difference between a good phono stage and a much better one. Regards, Felix aka catman.
 
Register to hide this ad
A good phono stage portrays the information in the grooves accurately, while a excellent phono stage draws you into the music and produces a sound stage that makes it seem real. IMHO
Regards,
Jim
 
I think perhaps you are beginning to focus on the smallest of details that may separate one component from another, especially components that may reside in a similar performance or price category.

When it comes to moderate priced gear and circuits, please this phrase is not intended to offend, no one take it that way, but the differences in design tend to be much larger. Which makes them easier to notice and evaluate. One thing I have discovered is that when the ladder of equipment is climbed, the differences between high performance gear minimises, and in some ways they sound more similar, and the differences become internally pronounced by those doing the listening and evaluating. I believe this is due to the fact that designers are using real music as one of their bench marks, and their designs take less short cuts, lower quality parts, and have more time spent optimising the circuit. With the target of real music, using important specifications(yes all specs are important to one degree or another...but great deisgners understand the relationships among them) and benchmark of lower noise floor, quicker slew rates, and other measurements, well the result is that these components from other manufacturers will stay truer to the source material, and therefore sound more similar than different.

So back to moderately priced gear and the larger differences between them. What happens is these components and their differences are evaluated in the context of a system. So there is very little documentation of these differences between perspective component A and B being consistent through a variety of systems. Component A may very well work nicely in a solid state based system that is a bit warm, while another component would prefer a system that is more lean, and detailed. major differences in sound quality of a component means that the systems they work well in will also need major differences between them to achieve a balanced perspective.

Which tends to be the problem with "Giant Killer" gear. They are only giant killers in the context of a particular type of system. In anything else they become very average. One person on this board has a tag line that says "different is easy, better is more difficult." Or something along those lines, at least it is a good paraphrase. A lot of truth there, and I suspect that at one level or another that is what is happening at this level of phono stage comparison. Please note, I am not saying any of them are flawed, or bad, or poor, or whatever. But that they are different in specific areas, although their overall performance may be situated closer than one first thinks, especially when it is taken over the context of several types of systems.

Hope that makes some sense? I am not sure it does, and I just wrote it........perhaps I should just return on keeping an eye on the chickens and make sure they are not dealing from the bottom of the deck.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
Catman, I do get what you are saying. When I finish the remodels and I'm not hopping from job to job, I'll dig out three or four especially well produced albums that trigger emotions in me.

I'll stack up the phono stages and and settle on one primary testing cartridge, or maybe three at the most. Then I'll do the side by side thing as best I can. We'll see where it gets me. I'm really looking forward to that day. Still a ways off though ...
 
Interesting topic Felix, i often get shivers up my spine, and sometimes i admit that i even get a thing in my eye ;), but i believe that the quality of the gear is only one factor that comes into play, to experience these kinds of emotions.

I myself have to be in a relax, ''receptive'' frame of mind to begin with, i also have to be in a quiet environement, next is the music itself, the melody, the words, the actual voice of the signer, different music, will of course generate different emotions.

I'd be curious to know wich songs bring wich kinds of emotions to you guys, who knows, maybe some of us connect on a deeper level without even knowing it.

Two songs come to mind, Rebecca Pidgeon's Auld Lang Syne, wich never fails to bring a tear to my eye, and Lindsay Buckinham's guitar solo in, I'm so Affraid, after wich, i always feel like lighting up, and i don't even smoke. :smoke:e

The last time i teared up was yesterday listening to a French song (my main language) anyway, it was an old $1 LP that i bought at the thrift store, and i was listening to my vintage Yamaha CA-610II and my Yamaha int amp and a Yamaha YP-D6/AT95e TT, so to me the price of the gear is far from being the most important factor, when it comes to generating emotions.
 
Last edited:
I always referred to it as "enjoyment factor", but same difference.

One phono preamp that seems to do this well is the Musical Surroundings Phonomena (Wish I had one).
 
I find that being able to listen 'thru' the system rather than 'at' the system works best for me, I do not want to hear the system nor any part of it as a 'signature' sound of that system. That can be done on a budget with reasonable expectations, careful choices, and a good practical baseline of SQ performance.
"Different" is easy, "better" not so much.
 
I agree that when the magic happens, the system seems irrelevant - it's just you and the music. Then I get up and do it all over again, and again, and again ... I have been known to listen to the same side four times in a row, mesmerized :music:
 
Personally I can get emotional over a song when it takes me back to a time and place which holds fond memories

Not so sure about being emotional over equipment
 
G'day all, it's early morning here and it has just occurred to me how a collection of electronic components and wiring can somehow convey a sense of emotion through sound.

I guess it is very similar to how that collection of nerve cells in our skulls can do the same sort of thing. :yes: Regards, Felix aka catman.
 
I've no doubt that phono stages are different, but not in any mysterious ways. Build an accurate inverse RIAA network and compare them with square waves. If that doesn't show differences, and I'd be surprised if it doesn't, you have to investigate interactions with the cartridge. There's some straightforward difference that, if it were made equal, would result in identical sounding phono stages. There are also some topologies that cannot be made to have identical responses.
 
You're right - but who will do the comparison? That's is what's missing in all of this - actual transient and wave form specs for components. Maybe in a year or two when I have my e-bench working with the scope and sig gen. But right now, I need to keep working on the boat and the house (to get the space to do the tests) and just listening. And the listening tells me what I need - for now :D
 
BrocLuno said:
You're right - but who will do the comparison? That's is what's missing in all of this - actual transient and wave form specs for components. Maybe in a year or two when I have my e-bench working with the scope and sig gen. But right now, I need to keep working on the boat and the house (to get the space to do the tests) and just listening. And the listening tells me what I need - for now :D
Click to expand...
I hear you, man do I hear you. I don't even have enough functional space in the house right now to disassemble and relube a table let alone try to do anything more sophisticated. Then there are the four pianos sitting waiting for me to rebuild them.... and I don't even have a boat anymore!
 
I've played with a bunch of entry level and some mid-level phono stages, all of which are solid state designs. Many provide greater detail and drive, but so far none that I have heard can beat the all-tube phono stage in my restored Fisher 400 receiver in regards to pure musicality and "emotionalism."
 
I wouldn't read anything into it. Factors in the enviroment and a host of other outside influences can contribute to "feeling" a piece of music differently on two seperate listening experiences.
 
ehoove said:
A good phono stage portrays the information in the grooves accurately, while a excellent phono stage draws you into the music and produces a sound stage that makes it seem real. IMHO
Regards,
Jim
Click to expand...

Perfect words in bold. ^

Not just for phono stages but any tweak I do to my system is judged by its ability to draw me into the music.

I just recapped my speaker crossovers. I noticed immediately that the sound is better and I am drawn in more than ever. As the caps break in this remains true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom