|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.48.193.8
In Reply to: RE: Would that sound good? posted by Salectric on July 04, 2015 at 14:01:01
Amen to that.
Follow Ups:
Lew,
My co worker, and good audio friend, used to get rid of cathode follower stages, from Audio Research SP3 A-1s, etc, and thought, into a tube amp, with short cables, the deleted stage sounded markedly superior !!
There are commercial products he told me about, it MAY have a C-J preamp series, where the only difference in the later model was an addition of a cathode follower stage, and most everyone prefers the early "simple " edition of the preamp, he tells me. We are referencing to the used market, and posted comments, after several decades of both versions' existence.
I can get the model numbers from him, if you wanna know.
Jeff Medwin
I and Salectric are both agreeing with you, that a "plain Jane" CF, at least all the ones I've heard, does impart an unpleasant coloration that is most evident when you "fix" it, at least a little bit, with a CCS. You can fix it even more, IMO, by adding a constant voltage source on the anode side of the CF, while keeping the CCS. That's the "SLCF" described by Allen Wright. If the interface requires lowering the output Z, a CF with a CCS or an SLCF is pretty darn transparent. However, I would not argue that avoiding the need for a CF is not better than any CF or variant thereof, when possible. Often that is one advantage of an "all-in-one" preamplifier, with phono stage on the same chassis as the linestage. In that case, one can usually dispense with any CF or other output buffer on the phono output.
Well posted !!! Xln't. Thanks Lew.
Jeff Medwin
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: