I looked the link for the EMT JPA 66 and I see that it is a tube preamp
unit, which basically eliminates it from serious consideration for
restoration work, whatever the price tag. When we are capturing audio at
96/24 these days, we want to catch all the transient response we can, and
we don't want tube equipment slowing that down and mucking it up. If
people like the "euphonious" sound of tubes, that's fine, enjoy it, but in
my view it's not really appropriate for serious restoration work. The
tubes are actually adding a kind of distortion that some people like, a
kind of sonic haze, but that's counterproductive when you are trying to get
the truest, clearest, best sound possible out of old sources. It's just a
fact that tubes simply can't move at the same speed as transistors.
I Googled the Timestep T01EQ and all that came up was running shoes. Does
anyone have the link for that?
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Corey Bailey <[log in to unmask]>
> Hi Tom,
> Excellent suggestion!
> I would add the Timestep T01EQ to that list (and any other commercially
> available unit made since the last review). The unit was mentioned by Dave
> Cawley in a previous post. I checked out the link he posted and it looks
> very interesting. I would also be happy to throw my hat in the ring as one
> of the reviewers. I have the test gear and know how to use it.
> Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
> On 4/17/2015 5:15 AM, Tom Fine wrote:
>> That's another preamp that should be in an ARSC "bake-off" panel article
>> in the ARSCJ! This would be a great update to old ARSCJ articles about
>> now-defunct devices like the OWL.
>> At about US$6770, Ted's Mousetrap is on the high end of pricing, below
>> the LOC Preamp but above other competitors mentioned so far.
>> Having done some equipment reviewing, I think this bakeoff is feasible,
>> perhaps something to propose to the new ARSCJ editor when they get up to
>> speed. Each company would be invited to submit a unit for review. The units
>> would circulate among review-panel members, perhaps a month loan at a time.
>> As always, the reviewers would need to be responsible for proper packing
>> and shipping, and not breaking the units. Perhaps there would be some ARSC
>> grant money to cover the shipping among reviewers? One reviewer should
>> subject the units to a series of tests against published specs and other
>> such things (hopefully this will be of interest to Gary Galo, because he's
>> set up to do this sort of thing). Using the units on actual working
>> projects would be great, but it's also completely OK to use a set of known
>> discs and compare results. The panelists should make audio files to
>> illustrate examples they discuss in their reviews.
>> This would be a great service to ARSC members and the disk-transfer
>> community in general. Take a scientific approach, including rigorous
>> testing, but also have first-hand accounts from disk-transfer experts on
>> how these things actually perform on the firing line.
>> -- Tom Fine
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Hallifax" <
>> [log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 6:30 AM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] "Best of both worlds" disk preamplifier
>> I reckon Ted Kendall's Front End pre-amplifier (AKA Mousetrap) fulfils
>>> about all the criteria mentioned. It's a beautifully hand-crafted 3u
>>> with 2 phono inputs, balanced inputs and outputs pre-, and post-eq. It
>>> incorporates Packburn-type noise reduction side chains that are easily be
>>> switched out of circuit. I believe a smaller, stereo version, without the
>>> side chains is under development.
>>> It's well known and used by serious archivists in the UK (EMI sound
>>> Abbey Rd, CHARM - King's College London, British Library etc).
>>> I'm thoroughly convinced of its sonic neutrality, and never hesitate in
>>> recommending it for transfer projects I'm involved with. It's in another
>>> league to much of the competition as one might infer from the hefty
>>> price tag!
>>> More info here http://www.tedkendall.com/mousetrap.php