When All Else Fails, We Can Whip the Horses Eyes

John Casler · « **on:** 20 Sep 2007, 01:39 am »

WOW!

Talk about a budget Phono Preamp.

I just sold my Onkyo P303 preamp that I have been using for years as a "phono section" since it has been generally heralded as one of the best.

So someone wanted it (I cut a good deal) and since I am being conservative, I thought I would pick up a "budget" replacement.

Enter the Parasound Z-Phono unit.

Well the difference was FAR MORE than I could have expected. In fact it is scary better.

Heard it straight away by spinning up a Japanese Pressing of SOFT PARADE by the Doors, and from the moment the stylus touched the groove . . . . .MAGIC!!

Bass far and away better, and richness in the MR that surely wasn't there before. Not to mention the crystal clear highs.

Didn't intend to do anything except "hook it up" and make sure it worked. Next thing I know: "When All Else Fails, We Can Whip the Horses Eyes, and make them Sleep and Cry".

So, if any one is looking for a "budget" unit, this one certainly is a good performer, at least in my set up:

Shure V15 > SME 3009 Series III > Denon DP755 > Parasound Z-Phono>Bryston BP26>NuFORCE Ref 9 v2>BCSE RM40s

Time to break out a few more cuts aa

PS = As a matter of disclosure I am a Parasound Dealer, but there is no significant profit to this inexpensive unit so I am not "promoting".

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #1 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 05:04 am »

John - not doubting ya', but here's another perspective on it:

http://www.tnt-audio.com/ampli/3_phono_preamps_e.html

I like Parasound's stuff myself - I think they offer very attractive value - and have for many years now.

Maybe if you try two for dual mono it may improve further - I now find dual mono a near must for phono for...

1. Superior channel separation
2. Increased power capability
3. Improved noise floor
4. More Defined highs and mids
5. Lifelike imaging and soundstage

...not so important for CD/line use as digital sources already have superior channel separation , have lower noise floors by their very nature. But to fully enjoy phono, I think I'm only dual mono from hereon out

John Casler · « **Reply #2 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 08:00 am »

Quote from: TheChairGuy on 20 Sep 2007, 05:04 am

John - not doubting ya', but here's another perspective on it:

http://www.tnt-audio.com/ampli/3_phono_preamps_e.html

I like Parasound's stuff myself - I think they offer very attractive value - and have for many years now.

Maybe if you try two for dual mono it may improve further - I now find dual mono a near must for phono for...

1. Superior channel separation
2. Increased power capability
3. Improved noise floor
4. More Defined highs and mids
5. Lifelike imaging and soundstage

...not so important for CD/line use as digital sources already have superior channel separation , have lower noise floors by their very nature. But to fully enjoy phono, I think I'm only dual mono from hereon out

Hi John,

Ya know if you hadn't pointed out that article (which is a good thing) I never would have come up with any "noise" problem because I never would have heard it.

After reading the review, I went to the rig and turned the volume to max, and yes there is noise. It is only noticeable if I turn the volume pot beyond 12:00.

While that might sound like a problem, I seldom listen above 9:30 because it is just too loud. So for my system (which is why I posted it) it is essentially noise free.

Another thing is that he (the reviewer) used MC exclusively which causes you to have to run your pre volume pot at a higher level, and also has a much higher S/N level (84db compared to 58db)

So I might alter my enthusiasm to suggest those using a MM might find this little gem to their liking. (for the price) but a caveat to those with MC's.

After a little more listening, the only noise I heard that wasn't as prominent before was groove noise, the new detail brings out, but is only noticeable between cuts.

Looks like an arm re-calibration (VTA, azimuth and tracking force) is in the future.

As far as the rest of your list, this little bugger sounded great. I may just have been lucky to have the SME arm and the Shure V15, as they are pretty synergistic and now it appears the "budget" Phono is also a nice improvement over what I had.

The soundstage, imaging, depth and "analog" sound is right there. Morrison was "alive" again, whipping Horses eyes.

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #3 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 01:25 pm »

Quote from: John Casler on 20 Sep 2007, 08:00 am

The soundstage, imaging, depth and "analog" sound is right there. Morrison was "alive" again, whipping Horses eyes.

Ultimately, that's all that bloody matters, no? That YOU liked it or that it brought you newfound appreciation for some kinda' music

The rest is all phooey

It didn't indicate a weighting for those noise figures, or under what circumstances they were drawn (back 20 years ago raw numbers-from the-blue like 84 and 58db wouldn't have been tolerated, but it's different today). It's likely the Zphono is better used for MM use (where higher cartridge voltage, like your Shure's 3.0mv, output masks some of the noise internal to the Parasound).

Good deal, JC, welcome back to audiophool's #1 high-resolution source (still - when it's done right) ...VINYL STILL RULES; if only in a dwindling lot of participants

Charles Calkins · « **Reply #4 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 02:32 pm »

My search for a decent and not too expensive phono stage is giving me a great big headache!!!!

I read that TNT article and put the Cambridge near the top of my wish list.
Craps!!! Every article I read about phono stages ends up declaring it to be the best thing since saran wrap.
Think I'll give this quest up and stick with the shiny little disc's.

Thanks for the post JC. I'd rather read about a piece of audio gear here on the circle rather than an audio mag. Not sure but it seems that the audio mag reviewers tend to lean toward the more expensive stuff rather than something with down to earth prices.

Cheers
Charlie

macrojack · « **Reply #5 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 02:41 pm »

Charlie - If you are not in hot pursuit of the nth degree of detail, you can get really smooth performance out of a Bellari VP 129. Gain is low and moving magnet is recommended. There is one tube if you want to play around rolling it and the unit can be had used under $200. On top of all that, it has its own volume pot and a headphone jack. Don't give up.

WGH · « **Reply #6 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 02:55 pm »

Quote from: Charles Calkins on 20 Sep 2007, 02:32 pm

Think I'll give this quest up and stick with the shiny little disc's.

Don't give up Charlie. For less than $100 you can put together a Hagtech Bugle
http://www.hagtech.com/bugle.html
Even though I use the more expensive Cornet2, also designed by Jim, the Bugle still gets rave reviews in the Hagerman Technology Circle, many builders pair it with the Piccollo MC headamp.

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #7 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 03:25 pm »

Charlie,

I've heard many, many good reviews about the Cambridge 640P unit....it would be my top choice for a good phono amp deal.

Only $169 here - http://www.spearitsound.com/Cambridge_Audio/Cambridge_Audio_540p.asp

The 640 is a lot better than the 540, so spend the difference.

I don't find that vinyl particularly needs tubes - there's nothing to smooth out with vinyl. If you have a easy-to-listen-to cartridge (as you do in the Grado), the highs are not particularly shrill. For vinyl only, as noise is a very important issue, I'd go solid state on your phono preamplification.

I think tube gear's re-emergence as a hi-fi amplification choice mostly exists because of CD technology. Vinyl is as complete a music source as there is...you need not add to much 'extra' stuff to it other than proper equalization

Charles Calkins · « **Reply #8 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 03:45 pm »

Chairguy:

Never gave it thought about not needing a tube phono stage. From my own personal listening experience a tube DAC. Tube preamp and SS amps work very good for me. Hey!!! Maybe I'll order 1/2dozen phono stages all with a 30 day return policy. I'll give all of them a fair try out and keep the one I like the best.
That'll work won't it?

Cheers
Charlie

P.S.
You live near me. Maybe someday I can bring that Stanton T.90 over to your place and let you hear it. I think it sounds pretty good and I haven't put the Grado in to it yet.

John Casler · « **Reply #9 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 05:20 pm »

Yes, it was enjoyable to find such a nice little unit, and in my case that I "lucked" onto probably the best combo to make it work well.

If I had had a MC, I probably would have shot myself, since I HATE noise.

But I think in the overall it was a good find.

I might have to try it with my Dynavector Karat Ruby MC and see what happens.

Quote from: TheChairGuy on 20 Sep 2007, 01:25 pm

Quote from: John Casler on 20 Sep 2007, 08:00 am
The soundstage, imaging, depth and "analog" sound is right there. Morrison was "alive" again, whipping Horses eyes.

Ultimately, that's all that bloody matters, no? That YOU liked it or that it brought you newfound appreciation for some kinda' music

The rest is all phooey

It didn't indicate a weighting for those noise figures, or under what circumstances they were drawn (back 20 years ago raw numbers-from the-blue like 84 and 58db wouldn't have been tolerated, but it's different today). It's likely the Zphono is better used for MM use (where higher cartridge voltage, like your Shure's 3.0mv, output masks some of the noise internal to the Parasound).

Good deal, JC, welcome back to audiophool's #1 high-resolution source (still - when it's done right) ...VINYL STILL RULES; if only in a dwindling lot of participants

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #10 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 05:29 pm »

Quote from: John Casler on 20 Sep 2007, 05:20 pm

I might have to try it with my Dynavector Karat Ruby MC and see what happens.

Sadist

John Casler · « **Reply #11 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 05:31 pm »

Quote from: TheChairGuy on 20 Sep 2007, 05:29 pm

Quote from: John Casler on 20 Sep 2007, 05:20 pm

I might have to try it with my Dynavector Karat Ruby MC and see what happens.

Sadist

In this case it might be more like "masochist"!!

BobRex · « **Reply #12 on:** 20 Sep 2007, 05:41 pm »

Quote from: TheChairGuy on 20 Sep 2007, 03:25 pm

Charlie,

I don't find that vinyl particularly needs tubes - there's nothing to smooth out with vinyl. If you have a easy-to-listen-to cartridge (as you do in the Grado), the highs are not particularly shrill. For vinyl only, as noise is a very important issue, I'd go solid state on your phono preamplification.

I think tube gear's re-emergence as a hi-fi amplification choice mostly exists because of CD technology. Vinyl is as complete a music source as there is...you need not add to much 'extra' stuff to it other than proper equalization

Don't go saying that to Audio Research or conrad johnson (or any of the numerous tube builders that predate CD.) No, this is an incorrect assumption. Back in the very early 80s I was running a Hegeman HAPI2 preamp (which was getting incredible reviews at the time). One day, egged on by the store owner where I worked, I swapped in a cj PV1. I instantly had one of those "Ah, I get it" moments and I've never looked back, been tubes ever since. It's not a case of "coloration" or "smoothing out", but rather space, flow, and "palpable presence (to paraphrase Sam Tellig)".

Yes, you do need the extra "stuff". You just don't know what that extra "stuff" is until you hear it properly.

Keep in mind that I'm 99.99% vinyl. CDs are mostly for the car.

Nels Ferre · « **Reply #13 on:** 26 Sep 2007, 05:48 pm »

Quote from: Charles Calkins on 20 Sep 2007, 02:32 pm

My search for a decent and not too expensive phono stage is giving me a great big headache!!!!

I read that TNT article and put the Cambridge near the top of my wish list.
Craps!!! Every article I read about phono stages ends up declaring it to be the best thing since saran wrap.
Think I'll give this quest up and stick with the shiny little disc's.

Thanks for the post JC. I'd rather read about a piece of audio gear here on the circle rather than an audio mag. Not sure but it seems that the audio mag reviewers tend to lean toward the more expensive stuff rather than something with down to earth prices.

Cheers
Charlie

Charlie,

I'd pass on the Cambridge if I were you. I've had one for a year or so (while I try to find the time to complete my DIY Hi Fi Supply Cole Phono Preamp kit) and it just took a dump...lights up but no output. Upon examination, I found all of the caps on the PS section are leaking.

Other than that, I liked it though.

I've bought another "hold over" unit (Pro-Ject) and have the broken Cambridge for sale cheap. I really need to make the time to finish the Cole.

Charles Calkins · « **Reply #14 on:** 26 Sep 2007, 06:12 pm »

Nels:
How long did you have the Cambridge before it died?

Charlie

Nels Ferre · « **Reply #15 on:** 26 Sep 2007, 06:15 pm »

Quote from: Charles Calkins on 26 Sep 2007, 06:12 pm

Nels:
How long did you have the Cambridge before it died?

Charlie

A year or so, I bought it used. I believe it to be 18-20 months old.

Charles Calkins · « **Reply #16 on:** 26 Sep 2007, 06:20 pm »

Okay I understand. I thought that if you bought it new it would be under warranty.

Charlie

hifitommy · « **Reply #17 on:** 30 Sep 2007, 05:58 pm »

its nice to see that you have a good tt setup now. remember when i nagged at you to do so?

so now you KNOW why. is that sme the one with the detachable headshell? i hope so, its SO much easier to swap cartridges. you may want to check out sumiko HS12 headshells at music direct for extras. i have several carts mounted and ready to swap. it also makes for easy inspection and cleaning operations when the shell is detachable.

the sumiko shell might be better for the DV cart as MCs like a little more mass and i know the sme shell is quite light. i once bought but never used one because of the fixed screw holes. i sold it to a needy sme user years ago.

i've been missing you at the laocas meetings but one of these days we'll hook up.

talk to you soon.

John Casler · « **Reply #18 on:** 1 Oct 2007, 02:09 am »

Hey Hi Fi,

Except for the PhonoPreamp, it is my same system. I just wasn't prepared for that inexpensive little Parasound to make such sweet music.

I must have hit on the right combo since it appears witha MC (I have MM) it has big time noise issues.

My arm is the SME 3009 Series III I think. The headshell doesn't come off, the arm actually "unplugs" from its base.

Been doing some Steely Dan, and SuperTramp.

Man that stuff is killer.

By the way, Charlie Moffet's "Spiritual Bubble" has made my Reference List for nice clean BASS.

As far as the LA Audio Society meeting. . . . Owwwll, be Bach

Quote from: hifitommy on 30 Sep 2007, 05:58 pm

its nice to see that you have a good tt setup now. remember when i nagged at you to do so?

so now you KNOW why. is that sme the one with the detachable headshell? i hope so, its SO much easier to swap cartridges. you may want to check out sumiko HS12 headshells at music direct for extras. i have several carts mounted and ready to swap. it also makes for easy inspection and cleaning operations when the shell is detachable.

the sumiko shell might be better for the DV cart as MCs like a little more mass and i know the sme shell is quite light. i once bought but never used one because of the fixed screw holes. i sold it to a needy sme user years ago.

i've been missing you at the laocas meetings but one of these days we'll hook up.

talk to you soon.

Airborn · « **Reply #19 on:** 1 Oct 2007, 07:13 am »

Hey Charlie, I just recommended the Cambridge Audio 640p phono stage to you in response to another thread where you asked about it, but that was before I read Nels Ferre's experience in this thread. I hope that doesn't happen to me!

I can only go by my experience, which is that the 640p is a good value and has been a good performer for the six months I have owned the unit. Hopefully Nels just got a bad apple and his experience isn't routine for 640p owners. I certainly haven't heard anything like that online or from reviews.