To SUT or not to SUT, that is the question

I have been lurking too long and so thus my second post here. I am a greenie having only gotten into the Home Audio (disease I have decided to call it) about three months ago. I loved putting together my first system with the help of various audio forums, and already decided to do an almost complete make over. I am strictly into analogue, as rediscovering vinyl got me into this mess, so my TT will be a Thorens 124 currently undergoing restoration and adding a plinth. The tonearm will be an SME-12 R2. My amp will be a Prima Luna Dialogue HP integrated.

I have two pairs of speakers enroute. I have a restricted tho large listening area that precludes floorstanders, so I elected to go vintage speakers as that seemed to be the best route to get large 'Bookshelf" speakers . I will audition an ADS L710 and a JBL 4312a. Both minty. I have a Manley Labs Chinook coming. I listen to multiple genres at moderate volumes. Mostly soft to medium rockish stuff from 60's to Indie. A smattering of early blues and a fair amt of 80-90s electronica.

After many thread searches and attempting to learn the whole tonearm/ cartridge compliance, resonant frequency calculator thing. I want to go the MC cart route (did some A/B listening on my previous system.
I ended up putting way more $ in the TT and amp then I anticipated. The speakers were reasonable compared to new ones, but I am not quite ready to go for $2k carts or 4k phono stages.

I am in a super rural area so the ONLY way I can audition is 'try and buy' (and resell if needed on forums or ebay). My cart choice after researching reviews and matching the SME 12" arm looks like it will be a Lyra Delos, one of the SS Denon 103r, or a Dynavector 17d3.

I keep reading about the large cadre of MC users swearing by the SUT as a necessity with them. I am no EE guy and from what I read their is a lot of complexity to them, or at least choosing the right one is complicated. I have read yay and nay on various MC carts performance just using the MC phono stage on the Chinook.

It seems like my system as the potential to sound decent (sadly, or gladly) I have no system to compare it to. I therefore don't want to shortchange its potential.

So in your educated ear's opinion, should I SUT or not?

Bytw, if I do SUT, I am leaning to a less than mega$ Bobs Devices version as I gather he can suggest exactly the one to use given my cart/ phono set up. I also assume that I must choose the cart first before the sut choice.

 

Use the Chinook as it works with both MM and MC cartridges. It is an amazing phono pre-amp. Step up transformers are only necessary if your using a moving coil cartridge with a moving magnet phono pre-amp.

Turntable into the Chinook, Chinook into the Dialogue HP Integrated. You should be good to go.

 

I'd go SUT into MM every time over an resistive-load and high-gain MC stage.
But hey, that's me.

 

I figured there may not be a consensus. I guess it depends on the individual. I would go the SUT route more readily if not for two things: I would have to rely on someone else telling me which SUT with which cart/ phono, and from what I understand, if I want to change MC carts, my the SUT for one Cart may be less than optimal for another. My pockets (for audio) aren't going to that deep to just cycle thru SUTs if I want to try a different Cart. I have only owned and heard two Carts, (a Denon 103r and an Ortofon 2M Bronze).

 

I have a really nice sounding step up transformer custom made for me by Geoff at Aurealis Audio. He was able to create a CineMag based unit that would pair well with my Audio Research preamp and a range of MC cartridges. Although Aurealis is in Australia, the price was very competitive with anything I could get here in the US. And the quality is outstanding.

http://www.aurealisaudio.com.au/mc-step-up-transformers/

 

You've got the Chinook which has plenty of gain, and resistance and cap loading options for a low output MC, I'd start by spending a fair amount of time listening to that before buying extra gear. I know we get obsessed with getting more gear and more gear, but it's a good idea to step back from the mania every now and then. SUT's can be great in terms of getting gain without thermal noise but they're not perfect -- the can ring, you need to take some care with the proper loading not just the reflected load the cart sees but the load on the SUT secondary, you need to take care with placement and cabling from the SUT to the pre to avoid hum, not major issues, but nothing's perfect, neither active amplification nor SUT. Live with the set up you have for a while and enjoy it, get to know it, then worry about changes, that's my advice.

 

That advice makes a lot of sense to me!

 

Absolutly do what Chervokas said. Live with the Chinook first. Let it break in. There is tube rolling to be done if you find want more top or more mids.... Play with the loading and gain settings on the Chinook.....

BTW, that front end on the Chinook is no slouch! It is a cascode JFET feeding one of the 6922 tubes. It is very quiet!

 

I am happy as can be with a Denon DL-103 running into a Parks Audio Budgie with Cinemag 3440A transformers and into an MX110. Loaded at 1:18.
Best sound I have ever heard here.
This on an RP6 too.

 

Ditto, re: the Budgie Cinemag. Comparing my V-LPS v.1's MC stage to the Budgie, the latter was a clear winner to me. Sound stage, separation, and overall clarity were significantly improved—the good ol' "locking into place." That said, the V-LPS isolated instruments thick lower mids better, so if you like a lot of orchestral, the Budige may not be the way to go. But for jazz and rock, it was a big step up, so much so that my long-range plan is to step up to the Cinemag 1254-based SUT.

 

A well designed, great sounding tube phono preamp eliminates the need for a SUT.

 

Do tell!

 

Randy,

The advice from Chervokas above is very, very sensible.

But I have to say that, after many years of listening experience, I (like raferx above) have developed a strong preference for using an SUT into an MM phono stage.

Yes, I do think you will be happy running whatever MC cartridge you choose directly into the Chinook (assuming proper loading and gain settings), but you may not know what you are missing unless and until you try an SUT into the Chinook's MM stage.

Suggest you look into the following:

1. A plain Denon 103 (not the "r" version) into the Auditorium 23 SUT specifically designed for the Denon 103. This combination is absolute magic -- insanely out of all proportion to its price. And you've got the perfect tonearm for the Denon 103. (BTW, the Auditorium 23 SUT for the Denon 103 works well with numerous other MC cartridges you might consider down the road.) If you're at all willing to consider this route, you might think about calling Matt Rotunda at Pitch Perfect Audio in Los Angeles. He's an expert on this combination and wise in all things SUT.

2. Alternately, give Bob Sattin a call at Bob's Devices. I have spoken to him at several audio shows and found him to be personable, candid, and quite the expert. He should be able to guide you to a cartridge that works great with your arm, an SUT that works great with that cartridge (and that will work with other cartridges should you want to change down the road), and the cabling required to hook everything up (he hand-makes some very nice ones that are not too expensive).

Sounds like you are on your way to a really great system. Best of luck.

--David B.

 

I'm a SUT believer, but you really need to try it for yourself. Start with your MC stage then buy a good SUT used - if you don't like it you can always move it on for little loss.

 

One might notice all of the people advocating for SUT's are using Denon 103's, and some of them with SUT's explicitly built around the Denon 103. I think there are some cartridge + SUT pairings that will probably be superior to any active MC stage. But I've rarely heard anybody suggest that a SUT beats an MC stage in every situation.

 

For the record, I'm advocating SUT's and have never used a Denon 103. My experience is with the Dynavector 20x2 and Audio Technica AT33PTG/II.

 

I bought the Budgie for the AT33PTG/ll and it just so happened to work amazingly with not only that cart, but the 103 as well!

 

Thanks guys! This has been a very productive post for me! I do appreciate all the advice. I am going to go the route suggested and try the MC first and dial in the settings.
I do like the suggestions also of down the road, experimenting with a SUT/ Denon 103 combo.
I have to say, my only listening experience with an MC Cart is with a stock Denon 103R. And I REALLY like the sound. I have put it on two different Kab modded Technic 1200MkIIs on two different phono/ pre and amp arrangements and it sounds awesome on both. I still haven't finlalized my cart choice, and I AM still looking into an upper end SS Modded Denon 103. So far it , the Lyra Delos and Dynavector 17d3 all will match with that SME 12" tonearm. Also I AM going for some amperex tubes immediately to roll into the Manley. I also have some major tube rolling ahead of me with the 8 Prima Luna HP tubes! Awesome forum you have here!

 

Many of the best tube phonostages have built-in SUTs or are designed to be used with step up transformers. That is usually the case because tube designers tend to find active solid state amplification to be undesirable and utilizing an additional active tube stage to amplify the low levels of many MC cartridges often result in too much noise. Examples of top level phonostages with built-in SUT include the Zanden phonostages (both their solid state unit and their tube units) and Viva Fono, example of units made to work with a SUT include the Audionote line. Aesthetix utilizes tubes for active gain, but, I have heard some noise with their phonostages.

While there are some formula for matching an SUT to the output and desired loading characteristics of the MC cartridge, I tend to agree with Stereophile's Art Dudley who found that there is a wide range of acceptability so precise matching is not necessary; he basically said that he never found a SUT that he did not like.

In addition to the SUTs mentioned above, I have heard, and really liked setups that included Audionote SUTs (very expensive, but really good sounding iron), Jensen transformers (older ones, I don't know about the much cheaper ones currently offered on their website) and old Altec microphone SUTs.

 

Well that does it, this thread pushed me over the edge. I just ordered a SKY 20 from Bob's Devices for my Ortofon Cadenza Bronze. We'll see what happens!

 

I think the huge thing that almost always gets left out of this discussion (or never even discussed actually) is how much more difficult it gets to wring all the performance out of low output MC's.

As the output drops to lower and lower levels both gain matching and loading need to be really optimized. It is much more critical than it is with MM cartridges which have a much higher output and generally broader gain flexibility in particular. Compound the very low outputs of some MC's and those gain issues, as well as overall quality of amplification at the phono stage and compatibility with upstream amplification in terms of S/N ratio, etc. etc. and the whole MC thing is much more complex than its MM counterpart.

I am not suggesting that everyone who has fallen in love with SUT thing has done so as a result of a cartridge/phono preamp combination that were mismatched but I've certainly read about a ton of those mismatches over the years on forums (including in this thread) that were bettered when an SUT was introduced.

The question that begs to be asked is whether those users would feel the same way about their SUT if they had experienced a better/more compatible combination of cartridge and active stage?

Personally, I think you can achieve good results with either (SUT or active) but careful matching is also critical with either. The SUT thing may actually be slightly more forgiving of minor mismatches. Cartridge/SUT combos like the Denon 103/Auditorium which are clearly designed for each other are going to take the guesswork out of the situation but those purpose designed combos are probably relatively rare.

 

I agree with a great deal of blakep's post above, but I honestly believe that the LOMC/SUT/MM approach has certain sonic characteristics that are generally not achieved (or at least not achieved to the same extent) with even properly matched LOMC cartridges and active MC phono stages. I just happen to value these characteristics greatly (tonal color, image density, rhythmic propulsion, and less-restrained dynamics), and I'm not alone in this regard. There's a reason companies like Shindo, Audio Note, and Ypsilon do not make active MC phono stages.

But I think a lot of the guesswork and potential for heartache can be taken out of the equation by consulting an expert. That's why both of my suggestions to Randy above included talking to an expert like Matt Rotunda or Bob Sattin. These guys probably hear more LOMC/SUT combinations in a month than most "civilians" hear in a lifetime.

The only other way I know to maximize the likelihood of success in going the LOMC/SUT/MM route is to get something like one of the upper-level Music First Audio step-up transformers, which have front-panel variable gain and loading. That ought to provide enough flexibility to prevent most mistakes, but the Music First Audio gear is not inexpensive.

--David B.

 

I think for now my approach is to set up my system with the components I have and try the multiple genres of music I listen to with it. Then, knowing me, I will likely at least explore the options for the SUT, but then again maybe not. The Music First Audio adjustable gain and loading SUT as mentioned would run me $4k. I am not there yet. My TT will end up running me $6k and the amp $4.5K. I decided not to total up what I will have in my upgraded system , that way I won't be fibbing if my wife asks.

 

+1000

 

What does this even mean...?