Print

Print


Powering C-8s is not a problem for me -- I own four (count them, 4!) 
Mac 20W-2 power amplifiers that do the job just fine. And they too 
have a hum adjustment pot.

Just offhand, I'm guessing that finding a D-8A power supply today (or 
a D-8, which would also work) would be far more difficult than 
finding a C-8 preamp. I found a couple online, in the $300 price range.

John Ross

At  4/4/2007 11:27 AM, you wrote:
>Hi John,
>
>Just FYI, Mcintosh built an external power supply called an D-8A
>that will run the c-4 or c-8 beautifully.It has a hum balance pot that
>is effective in minimising hum. Note minimising !!
>
>Hope this is usefull. Or buy the parts and build one yourself. Nothing
>special.
>
>Bob Hodge
>
> >>> [log in to unmask] 4/4/2007 1:20 PM >>>
>I've been working some from mono LPs to master to CD.  In my experience,
>accurate recording/playback eq is imprecise at best, and, quite frequently,
>imaginary.  Further eq is always needed.
>
>I've encountered a specific situation where I've had three issues of 
>a Period LP, all mastered before 1959, each with its own eq.  One 
>was early, probably Columbia, c. 1951, for which I used the LP 
>setting. Another, mastered by RCA with the type in 1954 in small 
>block letters and numbers, used NAB,  a third, using the same RCA 
>matrix number but handwritten, fell in the cracks somewhere. I used 
>RIAA and adjusted a whole lot with an equalizer.
>
>Tube equipment has hum- it's genetic!  It should be removed during 
>the restoration process.  If you prefer your finished audio with 
>tube sound, ok.
>But don't plead accuracy.  You are deliberately including non-musical noise.
>
>In short- you know the answer.  Listening.
>
>Steve Smolian
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "John Ross" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 12:31 PM
>Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] (dream) restoration phono preamp opinions
>wanted
>
>
> > At  4/3/2007 10:24 PM, EricJ wrote:
> >>When it comes to phono preamps that are capable of
> >>historical EQs, I was wondering...
> >>
> >>1.  How many people use anything but RIAA, NAB, and FLAT
> >>     EQs for digital transfers when doing preservation work?
> >
> > For 78s and pre-RIAA LPs, I generally use a tube-era preamp that has
>
> > front-panel adjustments for Turnover and Rolloff. A McIntosh C-8 is
> > particularly flexible, but it requires an early Mac power amplifier as a
> > power supply. I also like my Scott 121-C, with the Dynaural Noise
> > Reduction function. I wouldn't use the noise reduction for preservation,
> > but it's nice for casual listening. Of course, any tube equipment of that
> > vintage almost certainly needs to be re-capped before you would want to
> > use it for serious work.
> >
> >
> >>2.  Is the ability to reproduce a wide range of EQs on the phono preamp
> >>important, or do you apply the final EQ in the DAW using digital filters?
> >
> > I think either approach is acceptable, as long as the EQ is correct.
> >
> >>3.  Do you use an analog processor in conjunction with your DAW to apply
> >>EQ later to a FLAT digital transfer (ie. an analog processor loop)?
> >
> > No.
> >
> >>4.  How often do you run into the situation where your phono preamp
> >>doesn't have the EQ you want?  It gets close, but not quite what you want.
> >
> > That is not an issue with either the Scott or the McIntosh preamps.
> >
> >>8.  If the phono preamp has accurate EQ(s), is quiet, and has low
> >>distortion, does anyone prefer tube versus solid-state electronics? Does
> >>this matter?
> >
> > Obviously, I'm partial to tubes, but for RIAA  EQ, I also use solid-state
> > (including a McIntosh C-24, a Stanton 310 and some other broadcast preamps
> > with balanced outputs
> >
> >
> >>9.  Do you use a custom-built phono preamp or a commercial phono preamp?
> >
> > They're all commercial devices.
> >
> >
> >>And if there's a phono preamp that supports historical EQs that you
> >>really absolutely love, let me know, because maybe I should be buying
> >>instead of building.
> >
> > As I said earlier, I like both the Mac C-8 and the Scott 121-C.
> > Unfortunately, both are subject to the demands of the loony collectors'
> > market, so the prices are out of line with their value as playback tools.
> > You can find relatively inexpensive C-8s, but they're useless without an
> > expensive MC-30 or 20W-2 amplifier to supply power to the tubes.
> >
> > John Ross