Yes. But you want to order the extra card with it, so you can input a line
level signal before the EQ stage. Otherwise, you can't.

Best,
John Haley

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 10:08 AM, John Schroth <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Hi Tom:
>
> That would be the KAB MKII. Front panel controls for cartridge loading at
> the first amplification stage, gain adjustments on the back end, passive
> eq, output of both pre-eq and post eq at the same time, also a lot of other
> nice features.
>
> https://www.kabusa.com/frameset.htm?/phonpre.htm
>
> Regards,
>
> John Schroth
> MTS
>
>
> On 4/10/2015 8:00 AM, Tom Fine wrote:
>
>> I don't disagree in theory with Paul's idea about a flat transfer. What
>> I'd like to see built and marketed is a disk preamplifier that does the
>> initial impedence and capacitance match with the cartridge and the first
>> stage of amplification, then offers bridged output off that stage, goes on
>> to do a passive EQ with all the turnover and rolloff options, and then an
>> output stage. So, a person could play a disk once (efficient workflow),
>> make a flat transfer to a separate digital file, and do the EQ to the best
>> of their expertise and taste -- so there is immediately a usable/listenable
>> copy for researchers, library clients, online, reissue or whatever. The
>> idea of making two passes doesn't fit budget-constrained workflows, and
>> many of us are not at all sold on digital EQ (which also takes extra time
>> and extra steps after playback, again inefficient). The device I describe
>> offers the best of both worlds -- you get that flat transfer to archive and
>> do whatever in the digital domain at some later time, but you end up with a
>> listenable/usable sound file at the same time.
>>
>> It seems like such a preamp would not be a hard thing to design and
>> build. If one hates passive EQ, that's fine too, you could have an active
>> EQ stage or stages with self-contained feedback loops like an equalizer
>> module on a 1970s recording console (they were gain-neutral and
>> self-contained).
>>
>> -- Tom Fine
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stamler" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 8:04 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Disasters at Commercial Archives
>>
>>
>> On 4/9/2015 2:12 PM, Tom Fine wrote:
>>>
>>>> TOTALLY AGREE WITH CLARK! And yes, I'm "shouting!" Find the best
>>>> possible source of the media you want to transfer. CLEAN IT with
>>>> knowledge and care. Play it with the right stylus, at the right speed
>>>> and with the right EQ curve (and often "right" is what sounds best
>>>> because there is very little concrete documentation of recording curves
>>>> especially in foreign markets and especially in non-studio recordings).
>>>> Transfer it at high resolution, then be conservative and tasteful with
>>>> your digital restoration tools. This all sounds logical and common sense
>>>> based. But listen to most of the CDs reissuing 78s and you hear that few
>>>> people follow these steps, few people have good taste with using
>>>> "restoration tools," and many people seem to think consumers either
>>>> can't hear garbage work or don't care because they expect terrible sound
>>>> from 78s.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Or they think the public hates hiss and scratches so much that they're
>>> willing to put up with mangled music.
>>>
>>> A hearty amen to all the sentiments Clark & Tom expressed, except that
>>> I'd make a flat transfer and archive that.
>>>
>>> Peace,
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> ---
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>> http://www.avast.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> ---
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
> protection is active.
> http://www.avast.com
>