Re: [ARSCLIST] (dream) restoration phono preamp opinions wanted

[John Ross <johnross@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

At  4/3/2007 10:24 PM, EricJ wrote:
> When it comes to phono preamps that are capable of
> historical EQs, I was wondering...
>
> 1.  How many people use anything but RIAA, NAB, and FLAT
>     EQs for digital transfers when doing preservation work?

For 78s and pre-RIAA LPs, I generally use a tube-era preamp that has 
front-panel adjustments for Turnover and Rolloff. A McIntosh C-8 is 
particularly flexible, but it requires an early Mac power amplifier 
as a power supply. I also like my Scott 121-C, with the Dynaural 
Noise Reduction function. I wouldn't use the noise reduction for 
preservation, but it's nice for casual listening. Of course, any tube 
equipment of that vintage almost certainly needs to be re-capped 
before you would want to use it for serious work.


> 2.  Is the ability to reproduce a wide range of EQs on the phono 
> preamp important, or do you apply the final EQ in the DAW using 
> digital filters?

I think either approach is acceptable, as long as the EQ is correct.

> 3.  Do you use an analog processor in conjunction with your DAW to 
> apply EQ later to a FLAT digital transfer (ie. an analog processor loop)?

No.

> 4.  How often do you run into the situation where your phono preamp 
> doesn't have the EQ you want?  It gets close, but not quite what you want.

That is not an issue with either the Scott or the McIntosh preamps.

> 8.  If the phono preamp has accurate EQ(s), is quiet, and has low 
> distortion, does anyone prefer tube versus solid-state 
> electronics?  Does this matter?

Obviously, I'm partial to tubes, but for RIAA  EQ, I also use 
solid-state (including a McIntosh C-24, a Stanton 310 and some other 
broadcast preamps with balanced outputs


> 9.  Do you use a custom-built phono preamp or a commercial phono preamp?

They're all commercial devices.


> And if there's a phono preamp that supports historical EQs that you
> really absolutely love, let me know, because maybe I should be buying
> instead of building.

As I said earlier, I like both the Mac C-8 and the Scott 121-C. 
Unfortunately, both are subject to the demands of the loony 
collectors' market, so the prices are out of line with their value as 
playback tools. You can find relatively inexpensive C-8s, but they're 
useless without an expensive MC-30 or 20W-2 amplifier to supply power 
to the tubes.

John Ross