I know, I know..... this is real old tube stuff and there may be
better stuff out there now......

But, for the sake of argument, the Audio Research SP-11 preamp
frequently gets much high praise. You don't hear as much about the
similarly configured ARC SP-15 pre-amp. I would like to get one or the
other.

Would anyone care to offer their opinion or experience as
to which of the two provides the better sound path for
CD's versus for vinyl?

Thanks for your comments.
--
....R L

YxYx" to reply wrote:
I know, I know..... this is real old tube stuff and there may be
better stuff out there now......

But, for the sake of argument, the Audio Research SP-11 preamp
frequently gets much high praise. You don't hear as much about the
similarly configured ARC SP-15 pre-amp. I would like to get one or
the
other.

Would anyone care to offer their opinion or experience as
to which of the two provides the better sound path for
CD's versus for vinyl?

Thanks for your comments.
--
...R L

They are very very similar in sound. If you like one you should like
the other. They have identical phono stages. The only differences are
in the line stage and that is mostly a matter of different parts and
materials. Personally I like the SP 10 better than either and it will
cost you less.

Scott Wheeler

a écrit :

Scott Wheeler

Congratulation, your new nickname is really funnier than the previous one.

wrote in message
oups.com...

YxYx" to reply wrote:
I know, I know..... this is real old tube stuff and there may be
better stuff out there now......

But, for the sake of argument, the Audio Research SP-11 preamp
frequently gets much high praise. You don't hear as much about the
similarly configured ARC SP-15 pre-amp. I would like to get one or
the
other.

Would anyone care to offer their opinion or experience as
to which of the two provides the better sound path for
CD's versus for vinyl?

Thanks for your comments.
--
...R L

They are very very similar in sound. If you like one you should like
the other. They have identical phono stages. The only differences are
in the line stage and that is mostly a matter of different parts and
materials. Personally I like the SP 10 better than either and it will
cost you less.

Scott Wheeler


You're right the SP11 got cult status for very good reason and still sought
after, just google for user reviews that will tell you all you need to know.
I've had plenty of cash offers:-) It is a hybrid design so not just tube
The tubes though have to be carefully chosen for low microphony and to use a
support platform. I use isolation courtesy of Messrs Townsend's plus air
pods stacked. If you do this you will be rewarded with exceptional
performance.
I've tried many other preamps in the interim but nothing else has convinced
me yet.

Mike

YxYx" to reply wrote in message
...
I know, I know..... this is real old tube stuff and there may be
better stuff out there now......

But, for the sake of argument, the Audio Research SP-11 preamp frequently
gets much high praise. You don't hear as much about the similarly
configured ARC SP-15 pre-amp. I would like to get one or the other.

Would anyone care to offer their opinion or experience as
to which of the two provides the better sound path for
CD's versus for vinyl?

Thanks for your comments.

**Would you prefer to be killed by firing squad, or lethal injection?

Why would you restrict your choices, to two, faulty products? Expand your
horizons a little.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Trevor Wilson wrote:


**Would you prefer to be killed by firing squad, or lethal injection?

Why would you restrict your choices, to two, faulty products? Expand
your
horizons a little.


And just why are they faulty?

wrote in message
oups.com...

Trevor Wilson wrote:


**Would you prefer to be killed by firing squad, or lethal injection?

Why would you restrict your choices, to two, faulty products? Expand
your
horizons a little.


And just why are they faulty?

**Because both colour the music. The SP11 is the lesser of the two products.
There are other, far more sanely priced products, which do not colour the
sound. If the OP specifically requires a tube preamp (for whatever bizarre
reason), then he should audition a Conrad Johnson Premier 16. For a tube
preamp, it is remarkably neutral.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Trevor Wilson wrote:


snip


And just why are they faulty?

**Because both colour the music. The SP11 is the lesser of the two
products.
There are other, far more sanely priced products, which do not colour
the
sound. If the OP specifically requires a tube preamp (for whatever
bizarre
reason), then he should audition a Conrad Johnson Premier 16. For a
tube
preamp, it is remarkably neutral.

And how, or in what way, do they "colour" the music? Do they have bass
or treble rolloff, high distortion, or compress the dynamics of the
signal?

What does the c-j Premier 16 do that other preamps, commercial or
homemade, do not (or what does it not do that they do), and, why?

FWIW while I believe that listeners who listen exclusively to CDs
should have no preamp-they should purchase or modify a CD player to
directly drive their power amps in fine fashion(or buy an integrated,
which stereo amps should be anyway)-my own Marantz 7 clone audibly
outperforms the majority of preamps selling for any amount of money.
Only its phono section is less than magnificent. I listen to CDs,
vinyl, and other sources and while I have auditioned very expensive
preamps I notice little or no difference between them and what I have.
Of course this is a sighted eval and so hardly scientific, but it is my
subjective judgment that many if not most c-j, ARC, and other high
dollar tube products as well as many solid state products costing the
price of a new car are not superior to what you can cobble up at home.

Incidentally it's worth noting that certain manufacturers of tube
power amplifiers specifically enjoin users from using solid state
preamps because small DC offsets could be propagated through their
amplifier for long enough to debias the finals.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Trevor Wilson wrote:


snip


And just why are they faulty?

**Because both colour the music. The SP11 is the lesser of the two
products.
There are other, far more sanely priced products, which do not colour
the
sound. If the OP specifically requires a tube preamp (for whatever
bizarre
reason), then he should audition a Conrad Johnson Premier 16. For a
tube
preamp, it is remarkably neutral.

And how, or in what way, do they "colour" the music? Do they have bass
or treble rolloff, high distortion, or compress the dynamics of the
signal?

**They distort and add microphonics to the signal.


What does the c-j Premier 16 do that other preamps, commercial or
homemade, do not (or what does it not do that they do), and, why?

**The CJ goes to heroic lengths to manintain linearity and isolation for the
tubes. The PCBs are mounted with compliant rubber bits. ARC does not do
this. As a result, the ARC designs suffer with microphonic problems. The
image, for instance, becomes bloated.


FWIW while I believe that listeners who listen exclusively to CDs
should have no preamp-they should purchase or modify a CD player to
directly drive their power amps in fine fashion(or buy an integrated,
which stereo amps should be anyway)-my own Marantz 7 clone audibly
outperforms the majority of preamps selling for any amount of money.
Only its phono section is less than magnificent. I listen to CDs,
vinyl, and other sources and while I have auditioned very expensive
preamps I notice little or no difference between them and what I have.
Of course this is a sighted eval and so hardly scientific, but it is my
subjective judgment that many if not most c-j, ARC, and other high
dollar tube products as well as many solid state products costing the
price of a new car are not superior to what you can cobble up at home.

**Spoken, no doubt, by one who has yet to hear a CJ Prem 16. The Prem 16 is
as good as the best SS preamps I have ever heard. It is VERY quiet and very
low distortion.


Incidentally it's worth noting that certain manufacturers of tube
power amplifiers specifically enjoin users from using solid state
preamps because small DC offsets could be propagated through their
amplifier for long enough to debias the finals.

**Only VERY poorly implemented SS preamps suffer such problems.
Additionally, the vast majority of tube power amps employ an input coupling
cap, which makes your statement simply absurd.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

wrote in message

Incidentally it's worth noting that certain manufacturers of tube
power amplifiers specifically enjoin users from using solid state
preamps because small DC offsets could be propagated through their
amplifier for long enough to debias the finals.

Ironically, debiasing of this kind is not uncommonly used in an attempt to
reduce crossover distortion in ICs.

said:

Incidentally it's worth noting that certain manufacturers of tube
power amplifiers specifically enjoin users from using solid state
preamps because small DC offsets could be propagated through their
amplifier for long enough to debias the finals.

Next to impossible, since every tube amp (at least that I know of) has
coupling capacitors somewhere in the signal path.

In the very rare occasion that an amp doesn't have coupling caps,
(could be possible with a capacitorless OTL), the danger you describe
could happen.
But then again, only the output rail would swing up or down, not the
bias.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

Why, when a question is posed, would someone take the time to just slam
the question. Nothing productive in that. Obviously I am ignorant, or I
wouldn't have asked the question. But there IS a cure for ignorance.

Have't you ever heard "There are no dumb questions - just dumb answers"


wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:


**Would you prefer to be killed by firing squad, or lethal injection?

Why would you restrict your choices, to two, faulty products? Expand

your

horizons a little.



And just why are they faulty?

"YxYx\" to reply said:

Why, when a question is posed, would someone take the time to just slam
the question. Nothing productive in that. Obviously I am ignorant, or I
wouldn't have asked the question. But there IS a cure for ignorance.

Have't you ever heard "There are no dumb questions - just dumb answers"

"Ignorance is no excuse for a lack of knowledge". *

A Krueger, RAO, somewhere last year.


* spelling errors corrected for the sake of clarity.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

YxYx" to reply wrote in message
...
Why, when a question is posed, would someone take the time to just slam
the question. Nothing productive in that. Obviously I am ignorant, or I
wouldn't have asked the question. But there IS a cure for ignorance.

Have't you ever heard "There are no dumb questions - just dumb answers"

**I've heard that old chestnut before. That, of course, does not make it any
mroe correct. There are, indeed, dumb questions.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

First off, there's little question in my mind that tube RIAA stages
can and frequently do deliver superior subjective sound over many solid
state ones. This fits with Hamm et al.

Secondly, as I indicated before, I think the question of line level
stages is best solved by minimizing the circuit path and the number of
interconnects, i.e. no preamp at all. Tuners, tape machines, and DACs
(whether separate or built in) should be capable of directly driving
most power amps with which they may reasonably be expected to used
(i.e. 1Vpp into any bridging load single ended or +4dBm into 600 ohm
balanced or not) or the stereo amp should have a volume control and
switchable inputs (i.e. a line stage integrated). The preamp should
ideally be an obsolete critter. Especially in an era where so many
"audiophiles" have no analog sources.

(A corollary is the "passive preamp", another way of saying a
switchbox and volume control. I am sometimes inclined to think we'd be
better off doing it "telco style"-no, not doggystyling Lily Tomlin, but
putting WECO double jacks on the front and patching them as desired as
is still done in pro audio and even video with 75 ohm BNC cables in
patchbays.)

Thirdly and most significantly, I really have come to the conclusion
that whether the phono stage is solid state or tube is less important
than whether-or I should say _how far_-it is located from the
cartridge. Phono stages should be as close as possible as long as they
aren't too close to the table's motor. Putting a good solid state phono
stage in the table itself or immediately outboard, is the way to go. My
next project is going to be a phono stage in a little box using two
stage passive, as opposed to Baxandall, RIAA. If I use a variable lab
supply I can build it so I can use triode tubes or N-channel FETs and
experiment easily (and indeed if I use a 90-volt B+ as recommended with
6DJ8's I could probably just find a suitable FET that will live at that
source voltage.)

And as an aside, what magic mojo does c-j do that a hobbyist couldn't?