[Gopher]

The Jasmine is VERY good, and not for the price.  The negative review you point to is NOT the Jasmine being recommended.  It is the original LP2.0 which did NOT garner praise.  Its three generations behind current, the LP2.0SE is where things got fabulous.

I've steered a couple of ACers in its direction and all have been thrilled, most coming from more expensive gear.

I prefer it to my Eastern Electric Minimax phono and Nighthawk.  I plan on adding Bob's Device Cinemags to the mix down the line but I don't think the Jasmine is going anywhere.

[woodsyi]

I'm local...

...bought the turntable and cartridge from Command AV (both demo items.

Jeff didn't try to sell you a phono stage, e.g. Luxman, Manley, Whest? 

You are welcome to join us to listen to several phono stages. I will PM you with information.

EDIT:  I have to consult with the Mrs. on dates.

[mix4fix]

Jeff didn't try to sell you a phono stage, e.g. Luxman, Manley, Whest? 

You are welcome to join us to listen to several phono stages. I will PM you with information.

He tried; I was interested in it.

[jtsnead]

also I have owned in the last 2 1/2 years in order:
modded ps audio, Modwright, Nova Phenomana, Nighthawk

I had issues with radio station noise on the first two that is why
I went to the battery types, the Nova is a really good phono stage
which I still would of been happy with except I wanted easier
adjustment capabilities so I went with the NH which sounded
good but could not warm up to it. Got the Jasmine which I was worried
about with the noise issues, nut have not had any problems noise wise
at all. I can put it under my TT shelf which I could not do with the NH.
It is warmer sounding maybe a little less extended on top but very
musical. Probally will modify with better caps, wire and connectors.

[DaveyW]

A slightly different perspective from over the pond.

I spent quite a bit of time comparing some highly repsected units around this sort of budget covering MM/MI/HOMC and LOMC bases

Trichord Dino
Pro-ject Phonobox SEII
Dynavector P75

I ended up with the Project, it really shone through in this mix and for me remains a true bargain in the world of vinyl.

Cheers
Dave

[TheChairGuy]

I just got a Nottingham Innerspace Jr. with a Shelter Cartridge; any recommendations on a phono pre-amp?

Yes, one that is.....

Dual Mono (best for stereo imaging and separation)

Solid State (no tube gear can amplify eeny weeny cartridge signals as quietly)

Full Featured Preamp (that is one with integrated phono in preamp....to cut down on rca junctions and solder points)

In 70's heyday there were many to choose from that fit this description...as EVERY preamp had phono function prior to the Digital Audio Disc.  Well, not much has changed since then except that most folks listen to digital audio now.

I know of only one currently made today - I own it and it's the best preamp I've ever had in a long line - the Pioneer SX-A9 (J is the old version I had and the newest version is the mk II)

It's also freaky great priced today as many are clearing the old version out: $499.00 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300510962956&hlp=false&rvr_id=195027790486&crlp=1_263602_304652&UA=WVF%3F&GUID=4f7fa20a12d0a02669415d11ffe2c100&itemid=300510962956&ff4=263602_304652

Remote, tuner, too (use different amps thru the available preamp out jacks.....the preamp and MM phono section is the star here)

btw, I dig tubes everywhere else in the chain....digital front ends seem to benefit from them and my preference runs to tube amps.  But for phono where amplifying quietly is very important, a SS preamp is preferred. Digital loves to be smothered in tubes to paper over it's deficiencies that always arise in sampling music rather than recording and playing back as they sound, in analog domain.

btw, in the US it's offered as a receiver; in the UK it's pricier and it's only offered as an integrated amp (without radio)

[mix4fix]

I'm currently using a Z-Phono connected to a Marantz Reference integrated (which has a phono input but will not reach the where the turntable is).

[writeface]

I have Nott Spacedeck and used it with Project Phono box II. It sounded very good. I switched to Nighthawk for a while, but something kept bothering me. Now I have the Jasmine MK II. So far good, have to spend more time with it.

[Gopher]

I have Nott Spacedeck and used it with Project Phono box II. It sounded very good. I switched to Nighthawk for a while, but something kept bothering me. Now I have the Jasmine MK II. So far good, have to spend more time with it.

Sums up what I went through precisely.  I was very impressed by its technical merit, but over time the discontent crept in...  I juggled a ton of cartridges trying to find rightness, but eventually changing it to the Jasmine was what got me to my happy place. 

[TheChairGuy]

Re: Ray Samuels Nighthawk.

No disrespect to Ray (who seems to have a rep as a gentleman), but op amps are terribly unnatural sounding and battery power tends toward wimpy dynamics.

The two together probably make for a lousy combination for many folks...despite it's eerily silent amplification provided by better power and dual mono construction (great for stereo imaging and separation)

So, I'd image some folks thrilled with it for what it does well for $800...and as many dismayed and let down by the sound, too.

Dual mono, solid state, full featured preamp or receiver w/phono (no opamps)...the best way to go that does the least harm while providing the most potential benefits with the shortest and most direct transmission line for eeny weeny cartridge signals to pass thru

John

[LM]

 

but op amps are terribly unnatural sounding and battery power tends toward wimpy dynamics.

Fairly recently, I replaced a CA640P phono stage with an A.N.T Kora 3T MM SE (and I presume that the MC Kora model will have a similar characteristics for those with MCs) for much this reason.  I was hoping that the FET topology would provide an improvement to my taste and budget, without necessarily going valve or the more expensive LTD Kora models.  It did.  I had certainly found the 640 very good value for money but not as 'natural' as I wanted.

I’m not an expert reviewer but to me the Kora has proven to be very sweet and both richer and more musical than the 640.  Still quite detailed but very realistic and nothing wimpy or unnatural sounding IMO.  Just a thought as to another alternative to possibly consider.

[nocrapman]

Yes, one that is.....

Dual Mono (best for stereo imaging and separation)

Solid State (no tube gear can amplify eeny weeny cartridge signals as quietly)

Full Featured Preamp (that is one with integrated phono in preamp....to cut down on rca junctions and solder points)

In 70's heyday there were many to choose from that fit this description...as EVERY preamp had phono function prior to the Digital Audio Disc.  Well, not much has changed since then except that most folks listen to digital audio now.

I know of only one currently made today - I own it and it's the best preamp I've ever had in a long line - the Pioneer SX-A9 (J is the old version I had and the newest version is the mk II)

It's also freaky great priced today as many are clearing the old version out: $499.00 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300510962956&hlp=false&rvr_id=195027790486&crlp=1_263602_304652&UA=WVF%3F&GUID=4f7fa20a12d0a02669415d11ffe2c100&itemid=300510962956&ff4=263602_304652

Remote, tuner, too (use different amps thru the available preamp out jacks.....the preamp and MM phono section is the star here)

btw, I dig tubes everywhere else in the chain....digital front ends seem to benefit from them and my preference runs to tube amps.  But for phono where amplifying quietly is very important, a SS preamp is preferred. Digital loves to be smothered in tubes to paper over it's deficiencies that always arise in sampling music rather than recording and playing back as they sound, in analog domain.

btw, in the US it's offered as a receiver; in the UK it's pricier and it's only offered as an integrated amp (without radio)

What an fantastic find!
For the current price on the old version, it sounds like a steal.
So I shouldnt spend the 3K on a Bryston? 

[neobop]

Re: Ray Samuels Nighthawk.

No disrespect to Ray (who seems to have a rep as a gentleman), but op amps are terribly unnatural sounding and battery power tends toward wimpy dynamics.

The two together probably make for a lousy combination for many folks...despite it's eerily silent amplification provided by better power and dual mono construction (great for stereo imaging and separation)

So, I'd image some folks thrilled with it for what it does well for $800...and as many dismayed and let down by the sound, too.

Dual mono, solid state, full featured preamp or receiver w/phono (no opamps)...the best way to go that does the least harm while providing the most potential benefits with the shortest and most direct transmission line for eeny weeny cartridge signals to pass thru

John

Like most generalizations this is not necessarily true. The FACT of the matter is, than discreet components can not duplicate the function(s) of op amps as fast and clean (S/N) and accurately. It's the implementation and other components, usually cheap caps, that are the downfall of some op amp based phono stages. It is logical that budget components would use op amps. This makes it easy to draw an erroneous conclusion.

The same argument for using a built-in phono applies much more to components within a phono stage. Discreet components have to strung together with wire or board traces with all those solder connections. Here op amps have a hugh advantage. This is undeniable. As I said, it's the implementation that makes all the difference. Many op amp based components aren't regulated, or regulated effectively. This results in a greater difference than a regulated vs unregulated power supply.

The notion that a built-in phono is more desirable because of extra wire/connections also doesn't make sense. A built-in is compromised because of proximity to, and sharing the same power supply as the rest of the preamp or receiver. Your phono circuitry is less than a foot away from the transformer. A phono signal is only teeny weeny before it exits the phono stage. Coming out, it's at line level just like any other component. Having a separate phono stage is usually an advantage, not a disadvantage.

Nothing wrong with dual mono, but that's a secondary consideration when it comes to phono stages. It's much more important in an amplifier, delivering power. Separation, even in a budget phono stage will normally exceed that of a phono signal. So where's the advantage? I'm not saying it's undesirable, only secondary. Quality of design is much more important.

I never heard a Nighthawk. From what I've read, I suspect it's pretty good. I've don't know if you've ever heard one, or tried one. But I think it's unfair to trash it for the reasons you stated. They are not valid. IMO some of the best phono stages ever built, use op amps. Maybe battery power does compromise some, but like most generalizations, it's not necessarily true.  Having a battery powered unit is a great idea and solves lots of problems.
neo

[TheChairGuy]

What an fantastic find!
For the current price on the old version, it sounds like a steal.
So I shouldnt spend the 3K on a Bryston? 

There may be other reasons to consider the $3000 Bryston....but the Pioneer Elite SX-A9-J is so good at $500 it begs to be tried.

Caveats
* Weakest link is the amp section...best to use outboard amps to power your speakers

* Radio is sub-standard...if you're an FM fan , look elsewhere.  But, it works fine for the background music most use it for

Plus'es
* Dual toroid transformers and separate signal paths = true dual mono

* Terrific MM section (sub-standard MC section....use outboard MC amps if your taste runs this way)

* 'Direct' function...switches out all unneeded functions for purest path...a serious BOON to vinyl playback

* Dimmer - turn off all backlights and the signal is cleaner

* Remote - everything (volume, function, AM/FM tuning)

* Sound Retriever Function - surprising effective to flesh out compressed digital recordings on CD and mp3's.  It creates slightly false, but definitely bigger imaging for those recording that need it

Price - $500 new.  If you don't like it, sell it and lose very little when you move on.

It's 2 channel - so there are no unnecessary video or surround sound processing going in.

It's got clean styling as it combines preamp with tuner duties in one - it saves rack and electrical outlets. Yes, it has a standard IEC jack if you want to play around, too.

At $500, I only know of the Pioneer SX-A9-J that provides all this for so little - and a remote, too I keep thinking this kind of basic goodness would cost $2500+ with many other fancier nameplates on it.

[TheChairGuy]

@neo.  Yes, do note everything is generalities and subject to individual preferences.  But, true dual mono, solid state, avoiding op-amps and having a full functioned preamp will get you surprisingly far into the greatness that vinyl has to offer without felling one's budget.

Within a reasonable budget, op-amps sound horrid. Period.

RCA jacks suck - whether we're talking line level or post-amplified phono signals...they degrade the sound each time it passes thru a set.  You're still talking only <2 volts (FEEBLE) even after phono amplification...not enough to shock yourself even a little bit.

And, no matter what happens in a single transmission line, the stereo signal is intertwined and separation (which is a very real shortcoming for vinyl over digital technologies) suffers further degradation. Dual mono / separate transmission line preamplification is a surprisingly bit more effective than the raw measured numbers would suggest for stereo imaging. 

Yes, there are many more real benefits to dual mono power amplification, but dual mono preamplification is oft overlooked and adds quite a lot to the listening experience if it can be found for reasonable prices.

btw, I've owned a phono stage, a preamp and an integrated amp with battery power....they ALL suffered from wimpy dynamics.  Perhaps 8ohm+ speakers are needed, and or hi-efficiency speakers.  So, tho I've not heard the Nighthawk, I think I have a reasonable and varied background in battery powered gear to infer why someone MIGHT not like it.  It wasn't trashed - it was merely my insight into battery powered gear.

A battery powered phono stage is a brilliant place to implement it as the need for quiet gain is needed...but it often falls flat in real world listening, unfortunately 

[neobop]

Actually, the Nighthawk, 640p, and the vast majority of "best" budget phono stages use ICs, not op amps. I assume that's what you meant, and that's what I was responding to. Samuel's $4500 phono stage also appears to use ICs. Walker's Reference uses ICs, that one prob cost $10K+. Ironically, your Pioneer prob uses ICs too. Ever look under the hood? Get a schematic and chances are you'll be looking at them. So, I don't know what you're talking about. Discreet components are much more expensive to string together and perform much worse, unless gobs of money are used. Then they still perform worse. So what's a reasonable budget non IC?

I know it's a commonly held audiophile belief that RCAs are bad. They're not. They do the job just fine. What's the problem, won't hold up on a space mission? It's just another connection and a volt or two is no different than a tuner or tape deck. A phono signal can be as little as .2mV - that's millivolts, not volts. You don't seem to object to a jillion connections with discreet components, yet one set of RCAs at line level is somehow a problem. I must admit, I still don't get it.
neo

[mix4fix]

What about a JLTi phono???

[neobop]

Target is around $600. That seems to leave a couple of standouts or  something used in the under $1000 range. The Sim Audio Moon 5.1 LP is said to be really good too, but that's around $1600.
Tough decision when you can't hear them first.
neo

[95Dyna]

Re: Ray Samuels Nighthawk.

No disrespect to Ray (who seems to have a rep as a gentleman), but op amps are terribly unnatural sounding and battery power tends toward wimpy dynamics.

The two together probably make for a lousy combination for many folks...despite it's eerily silent amplification provided by better power and dual mono construction (great for stereo imaging and separation)

So, I'd image some folks thrilled with it for what it does well for $800...and as many dismayed and let down by the sound, too.

Dual mono, solid state, full featured preamp or receiver w/phono (no opamps)...the best way to go that does the least harm while providing the most potential benefits with the shortest and most direct transmission line for eeny weeny cartridge signals to pass thru

John

What happened chairguy?  Here's what you posted in the original RSA Nighthawk thread:



Brilliant idea from Ray Samuels...and a fair price point, too.

Dual mono is so incredibly beneficial to phono performance....and solid state and battery power is as quiet as you can dial up 40db or so gain  (again, seriously important for phono)

I don't for a moment doubt this one IS a true giant killer. Enjoy it folks.

If that dude can keep that price point, he's gonna' wipe out a lot of competitors with it.

John

(EDIT: holee cow, did I see that it handles low output MC's, too?  More brilliance!!)

[TheChairGuy]

What happened chairguy?  Here's what you posted in the original RSA Nighthawk thread:

Brilliant idea from Ray Samuels...and a fair price point, too.

Dual mono is so incredibly beneficial to phono performance....and solid state and battery power is as quiet as you can dial up 40db or so gain  (again, seriously important for phono)

I don't for a moment doubt this one IS a true giant killer. Enjoy it folks.

If that dude can keep that price point, he's gonna' wipe out a lot of competitors with it.

John

(EDIT: holee cow, did I see that it handles low output MC's, too?  More brilliance!!)

It's a very fair price for what is offered at $795.00

Dual mono, MM/MC and battery power are nice to get at the price point.

I owned a $1000 Musical Surroundings Phono preamp with just these features....and I didn't like it.  Dynamics were very wimpy and the preamp deadened the music.

But, that was my opinion of it and it's a best seller for Musical Surroundings for many years...so what do I know 

It was ULTRA quiet and the dual mono is a real boon to playback...I can nonetheless empathize with anyone that doesn't like it as that was my experience with a dual mono, battery powered phono preamp, as well. In some respects, it was also a GIANT killer.

Those who like the sound of it - may you enjoy it.  Those that don't - your opinions are equally as valid.

@neobop.  No, I do mean op-amps in the Nighthawk.  Ray uses them in his similarly sized (and priced) battery powered SR-71 headphone amp. It would not at all surprise me that to reach a much lower price point, highly efficient, quite compact but often unnatural sounding op-amps are used in the Nighthawk in order to reach this price point.

Perhaps someone that owns one can confirm this....I am only making an assumption based on 25 years of marketing in consumer products on this one.

Seriously, I'm not slagging Ray Samuels here (who is, as I've heard, a gentleman) - making a phono preamp at low volumes to audiophool crowd with commendable features like dual mono, batter power, MM/MC and resistor settings for $795 is a trick move.  But, to reach this price point, several areas important in sound may have been glossed over to achieve it.

For $300 less, I have a Pioneer Elite SX-a9-J full featured receiver (used as tuner/preamp only) with phono, fully dual mono with twin toroids, AM/FM, remote everything, etc, etc and it sounds vastly better than the Musical Surroundings did.   But again, that has been my experience and everyone is entitled to their own  .

Regards, John