Review: Denon AU-S1 step up transformer

 

Moving back to a low output moving coil has been a real eye-opener.  Yes I had experience with the venerable Denon DL-103R mounted on a rather sketchy VPI HW19 Mark III with a Rega RB300.  But, at least with that system from long ago, I never quite cottoned to the sound I was getting.  I wanted more.  Luckily I found it (some time later!) with the Rega Planar 8 with a Rega Ania Pro MC cartridge.  This combination has quickly become my favorite analog reproducer so far.

My MC step-up transformer is the popular Cinemag 1254 which did its job quite admirably.  Nonetheless I had a nagging thought I could do better here.  Would a passive device, especially something made of wound wire actually make a difference?  I had to find out.  So I read and read some more, trying to find an affordable venue to follow.  I thought of buying some Lundahl transformers and DIYing my own case.  Or I could have gotten anything else, including an active device to give me that additional gain needed for the low 350 micro volt output of the Ania Pro.

Several searches on Ebay and I saw a Denon AU-S1 unit for sale.  It looked extremely well built, more so than my Cinemag "transformers on a box" look.  But finding information on the Denon was, to be blunt, extremely difficult.  It was designed for Denon's once top-of-the-line cartridge, the DL-S1 that cost a princely $1000 way back in 1996.  The transformers themselves are mounted horizontally in the case with padding to reduce vibration.  How much this would work in real life is questionable.

After several audio philosophical discussions a friend, I decided to take the risk on purchasing the AU-S1.  It was the idea that something like this would be of the highest quality given the amount of time and research that a company like Denon can do.  There was only way to find out.  Thankfully the Japanese seller was very quick and I received the transformer(s) in only three days.  The AU-S1 weighs _alot_ for such a small thing.  Build quality was extremely good with gold-plated RCA jacks and (oddly enough) separate grounding lugs for each channel.

 I took out the Cinemags and put the Denon in its place.  Turning the volume up I was immediately taken aback by the amount of hum I was getting out of the speakers.  Moving the AU-S1 around and I was able to get some reduction in noise but still I wasn't happy about it.  It wasn't until I touched my fingers to the left RCA outside jack and then to the ground lug that the hum completely disappeared.  It's the nature of the Rega turntable output connection which doesnt have a separate ground wire.   To circumvent this grounding issue I took a length of solid-core bare wire and wrapped it several times around the left RCA outside lug with one end plugged into the ground lug of the AU-S1.  After that I was hum free!

Well, dear readers, that was a lot of introduction for something that was ultimately bought as an experiment.  How does it sound?  Read on.

Initial impressions were good - solid bass, a "cleaner" view of the soundstage, and just better air. Several records later and a listening session with my audiophile friend and I can say the Denon AU-S1 was a worthwhile upgrade.   

Does it surpass the Cinemags?  Yes.

The Denon reproduces the space around instruments better - such as the horns on Lonnie Liston Smith's Visions of a New World.  This gives the impression of more body and weight.  

And speaking of body, the bass is terrific.  It feels like an extra octave is being recovered - not bloated - but detailed with depth and slap.  Something that was really apparent on Brian Bennet's Voyage album as the excellent bass player provides the space age groove.

Soundstaging is deeper and wider than before.  An example of this is the beautiful Dead Can Dance album Into the Labyrinth.  The second song, "The Ubiquitous Mr Lovegrove," has a moment where the drum shifts left and right, now well detailed beyond the edges of my KEF speakers.  A true demo disc moment.

Overall there seems to be less grain than before.  Why?  I have no idea.  The purity of the copper?  The padding reducing microphonics?  The quality of the transformer windings?  Your guess is as good as mine but the clarity is higher than before and that's all that matters.  Finesse would be a fine word to discuss these SUTs, and given their roughly $700USD price they are a good bang for the buck.  Perhaps, when funds permit, I'll try something more expensive.

Denon AU-S1 Step-up Transformer Specifications
- Ratio: 1:13
- Frequency range: 10Hz-80kHz
- Size: W150 x H70 x D175mm
- Weight: 7.1 pounds

Review: Psvane 12AX7

 

The Psvane T-12AX7, apparently the base version, is a Chinese design that looks much like a vintage one with gray ribbed plates, quality construction, and steel pins.  The triple-layed mica also looks good.  Bulb size, like so many other new tubes, is slightly larger than my collection of old stock, a mm or two difference in height and circumference..

Break-in was approximately fifty hours as the driver tube in my Frankenstein Eico ST70.  This is basically the classic Mullard 5-20 circuit.  It's been my general experience that the driver tube - before the phase splitter - has a high impact on the overall amplifier sound, more so than the phase-splitter or even the output tubes.

Listening was initially done while reading a book.  There were several times where I had to look up from the pages to truly appreciate what I was hearing.  Like the TJ FullMusic, the Psvane has a great almost vintage tone.  I was hearing little details - an example is Lonnie Liston Smith's Vision of a New World - that I thought weren't apparent to my standard vintage Mullard.  I was beginning to feel some really high hopes for this Psvane.

However some further, more detailed listening, some of it shared with an old audiophile friend with an extensive knowledge of 12AX7s both new and old, began to show some weaknesses.  Though the sound was never muffled, the Psvane, like the TJ, also lacked inner detail and bloom around the instruments.  But wait a minute, you say, where did that extra detail you mentioned go?  It is a strange effect of the Psvane: suppression of reverberation both artificial or natural, pushed some information forward.

Keep in mind this is still the best new production 12AX7 I've heard and I could see use for it in gear or speakers that aren't the most transparent.  The bass was excellent, there was a distinct lack of glare unlike some lesser "solid-state in a bottle" new production tubes.  The midrange was also even as was the treble.  It was just the lack of detail that stopped the Pvane running with the best of the vintage 12AX7s.

Disclaimers: No tube is 100% perfect for all gear.  The only way to be sure how a tube will sound in _your_ system is to hear it.  Also a tube in a phono stage, for example, may have different audio characteristics than say line, input, or phase-splitter use.

 Negative feedback - several dB in this circuit - also reduces the sonic signature of the tube.  An example of this came apparent to me when I built a triode-connected EF86 linestage.  The tube selection - GEC CV4085 and the Mullard "long mesh" were the best - played a big role in the sound quality.  However the EF86 in my Eico HF60 monoblocks were less important, most likely due to the loop negative feedback or perhaps the total number of tubes in play with a more complicated circuit.

 It should also be noted that I am not biased towards vintage tubes.  I really do want a new tube that can compete with the old.

So take this review as a general guideline, not as hard fact.

Review: Denon DCD-600NE CD player

 (image from the Denon website)

I still remember the first time I heard a CD player - this was at some teenage party back in the mid-1980s and I was rather impressed how loud it played.  Hey this was before I knew what being an audiophile was.  It was a year later when my dad bought a Magnavox player for his system.  I spent a mighty chunk of change - $22 - buying a Misfits compilation that, sadly, ended up sounding very bright, thin, and irritating to the point where a headache soon came on.  Later, in college, when I got into tube gear, I owned a Theta Basic DAC.   However I still thought my Thorens TD-166 turntable with a $20 Grado Black cartridge served the soul of music much better.

Years later there was a time that I was into digital.  By then vinyl was getting harder to get a hold of and the CD re-issues were pumping out some excellent compilations of rarer groups.  I started experimenting with several DIY modifications and designs.  For example, the transformer-coupled RAKK DAC was one of the better iterations of digital I have ever heard.  But in the end it was analog that won my heart.  Over the years my CD collection continued to shrink while my passion for vinyl increased and became the focal point of my system.

Time marched on - CDs are now ridiculously cheap.  From a purely music lovers point-of-view, they are an easy way to build a music collection, especially compared to the now high price of vinyl.  I decided once again to buy a CD player, hoping that technology has improved the Red Book standard.

But what to get?  I searched through Ebay and Audiogon, looking at several vintage models.  Ideally I wanted something with a digital out so I could experiment with DACs in the future.  Accessories 4 Less came to the rescue with a refurbished Denon DCD-600NE player that featured a 32 bit DAC and AL32 processing that - to quote their website - "expands audio data to 32 bits and uses a proprietary algorithm to interpolate the data and perform up-conversion and sampling, achieving a playback sound that is close to the original source."  So, as my friend likes to joke, "Perfect Sound Forever just got MORE perfect."

The Denon DCD-600NE is a stripped down player and - shockingly - has a metal enclosure.  If you want to use the full functions - random play, direct mode, track programming, etc, - this is where the rather large remote comes into play.  Digital out is via Optical - not ideal - but this may point to a future Schiit Bifrost 2 DAC upgrade.

So how does this little beast sound?  Initial impressions weren't the best.  There was a forwardness to the sound that was tiring, along with a sense that, compared to even my lowly Dual CS5000 turntable, that 20% of the musical information was just missing.  What I mean are the spatial cues were gone, rendering the voice and instruments as very two-dimensional.  A good reproduction system should have depth along with breadth, transporting the listener to the mind of the producer, or with some classical recordings, to the venue itself.  Instead the Denon reminded me once again why I prefer vinyl for home listening.

After a few days of break-in I decided it was time for some comparisons against two different turntables along with some general impressions.

The forwardness was reduced but there is no other way to say this - this budget Denon still sounds like digital.  Compared to the same LP, the CD is missing reverb cues; either the room or artificial.  An example of this is Willie Nelson's Stardust.  The body of the acoustic guitar is gone, leaving just the top layer of the guitar notes.  The "black background" sounds uncanny but not in a good way.  It's like a black hole of information - nothing is there! - compared to the warmth and fullness of analog which captures the space of the room and the size of the instruments.  It feels as if the music has gone through some kind of horrible clinical ward, stripping off the flesh of the music and leaving only the bones.

Now that does sound like a harsh review.  To be fair some CDs were better than others, like a few Chet Baker albums in my collection that sounded quite good.  Jazz is usually well-recorded but I still preferred my LP versions - even with my second turntable, a budget Dual CS5000.  At least with analog my brain connects to the music and I can relax.  With digital I am still gritting my teeth and feel uncomfortable with the overall presentation.

Maybe a DAC will bring some improvements.  We shall see!

System:

• Audio Research SP8
• modified Eico ST70 with 6AR6 tubes
• Cardas Neutral Reference interconnects
• KEF R500 speakers
• Dual CS5000 turntable with an Ortofon OM20 cart, aftermarket Shibata Stylus
• Thorens TD309 with Ortofon 2M Bronze
  

Review: A Tale of Two Schiits - Mani 1 vs Mani 2 phono preamp

(photo from Schiit)

I've been using the original Schiit Mani 1 phono preamplifier for some time.  Its sole purpose has been to provide the needed amplification and equalization for my second turntable, the Dual CS5000.  It has done well plugged into the line section of the Audio Research SP8, which has a phono section that is used for the primary turntable, a Thorens TD309.

To be fair, the Mani is a budget phono stage so I could put up with the slight graininess, mid-fi resolution, and the general lower fidelity.  For all the Mani 1's faults, it is still better than a lot of stock phono sections found in budget receivers, preamps, and integrateds.  And given the mostly background music it was used for I had no complaints.

A recent visit to the Schiit Audio site and I saw that a second version of the Mani has been released, this one using a different op-amp and it was also direct-coupled.  The case looks exactly the same but the dip switches on the bottom have changed, allowing more settings for MM and MC cartridges.

To cut to the chase, compared to the old version, the new Mani 2 is more detailed, faster, has better resolution, deeper bass, and higher overall fidelity.  It also images, left-to-right in a fashion that will be most pleasing.  It isn't perfect - nothing is! - but it does swing at a higher than the $149 (black face model) price point suggests.

Where the Mani 2 ultimately fails - compared to the Audio Research SP8 or the Classe Five - is inner detail and that certain "you are there" magic that I've heard with these more expensive units.  The soundstage of the former is also flatter without that depth I've come to expect.   However, to be fair. the Mani 2 does strike awfully close to better preamps making my budget Dual CS5000 sound a lot closer to the combination of Thorens TD309 and the ARC SP8 phono stage.  Depending on your front end, amps, and speakers, this difference may not matter at all.

 As always your mileage may vary depending on your front end, setup, and preferred listening habits.

System:

• Dual CS5000 with Ortofon OM20 and an aftermarket Shibata stylus
• Thorens TD309 with Ortofon 2M Bronze
• Audio Research SP8 with vintage Mullard 12AX7s 
• Eico ST70 "Frankenstein" amplifier with 6AR6 output tubes
• KEF R500 speakers
• MIT interconnects
• Cardas Twinlink speaker cables
  

Review: Ortofon Super OM 20 Phono Cartridge

Introduction: Reviewing phono cartridges is a difficult task.  Why?  Because it's part of a complex system involving the tonearm. platter, vibration, setup, and, based on the quality of the other components downstream, can radically alter one's perception of the whole system.  Also a cartridge that works wonderfully for one system may be dreadful on another.  That's the nature of the analog beast: difficult to tame but, to my ears, worth the trouble.

As for why I decided to replace the Shure M97xE; it's a matter of personal taste.  The M97xE is one smooth cartridge but I had the feeling I was missing something, mostly the very top end sparkle.  And since I'm upgrading my current system - one component at a time - I thought it was time to try something a little different. The OM series was mainly selected because it is supposed to be an ideal match with the lightweight arm on the Dual CS5000 turntable.  The CS5000 originally did ship with an OM cartridge, so why not take the manufacturer's recommendation to heart?

Among the family of Ortofon's OM cartridges I selected the OM 20 - it is affordably priced and, based on my online research, strikes a good balance between detail and listenability.  It's a Moving Magnet cartridge with a healthy 4mV output, which will work perfectly with my soon-to-be-replaced Adcom GFP-555 and my next future preamplifier.

Setup:  Since the Dual CS5000 has a lightweight tonearm, I pulled out the removable 2.5g weight that is inserted on top of the OM20 cartridge.  With the Dual's easy to remove headshell, cartridge swaps are easy; provided you have a pair of good eyes.  I'm definitely due for my first pair of bi-focals so it took a bit of fiddling with the wires, along with some careful tightening of the headship clips.  Once I had the cartridge mounted, I used the protractor that came with the turntable.  The narrow body of the OM 20 cartridge makes alignment easy.  Tracking force was set at 1.2g using my fiddly digital gauge.

Initial Thoughts: After installing the new cartridge I found the sound to be a touch bright and forward.  Lively was the first thought.  Some hotly records vocals were strangely muffled. After adjusting the VTA and double-checking the tracking force, I spun a couple of records that night.  A few days later I felt comfortable enough to start some detailed listening.



Lisa Gerrard of Dead Can Dance has a voice that is both ethereal and powerful.  The Mobile Fidelity pressing of Spiritchaser showcases her vocals wonderfully, as does the Ortofon OM 20.  The notes from that golden throat soar above the primeval music, and roll around, expand, and then come together like I'm under the effects of a psychedelic drug.  This is about as close as one can get to being high without taking an illicit substance.  I've heard this record done a little better on more expensive systems, but not by leaps and bounds.  Nor have I ever heard the Dual CS5000 sound this good.  Sure isn't in VPI Aries 1 territory, and any sins are ones of omission, but I am loving the overall sound coming out of the Wharfedale Denton speakers.  Considering the budget, very impressive.

Bass has depth and impact, while the left-to-right stereo spread go beyond the edges of the speakers.  The real magic is in the midrange - lively, engaging, and with good pace and timing.  The treble is more extended than the old Shure cartridge, but it isn't bright either.  So far so good.  For my next record I picked something a little more down to earth.


I'm not sure if you will find many Outlaw Country fans in audiophile-land, but with Waylon Jenning's Honky Tonk Heroes they're missing out on one humdinger of an album.  This first pressing is pure RCA studios: warm, wonderfully recorded, and just brimming with that old school Nashville production.  Jenning's vocals are rich, and if a system doesn't capture this magic, then you know something is wrong.

Bass: Attack of the deep bass guitar is quick with no overhang.  Warm, dark, and low - like it should be for this era of recording.

Midrange: full-bodied but no excessive warmth.  In comparison the Shure could overdo this portion of the spectrum. The upper midrange of the Ortofon is definitely more lively but still captures the huskiness of Waylon's vocals.

Treble: More extended, lively, but the upper end never becomes aggressive or shrill.  How much of this is the Denton speakers remains to be seen.  In this department the Shure was more rolled-off, and perhaps more pleasing on some hotly recorded albums.  

Other: Channel separation is excellent and every instrument sits in its own space.  I've heard more detail and body with moving-coil cartridges but this moving magnet, at least in this system, is more cohesive.  There is no portion of the frequencies that stick out like a sore thumb.  Depth is also less than the best I've heard.  It's not quite flat-as-a-pancake, but I certainly never got the illusion that the drums were in the next county.


Neil Young's Live at Massey Hall 1971 is an excellent recording that should be part of anyone's collection of good music and good sound.  This is a very system friendly album that sounds great on every stereo I've owned.  This current budget setup was no exception.

The body of the acoustic guitar was about as real as it can get, and so were the vocals.  The effect is similar to sitting mid-row in a small coffee shop.  So a very personal album.  Micro and macro dynamics of the guitar and the piano were fairly realistic, only bettered by the Aries 1 turntable and UREI speakers of yore.  Once again I heard shorter depth and a bit less detail than my older systems, but there was still a cohesiveness that really brought my enjoyment factor to a very high level.


At one time, when I was a much younger man, The Clash was called "The Most Important Rock Band in the World."  If anyone was listening to me, I would have to snub The Clash and go for James.  Their Eno produced Laid is an early example of what makes their albums sound so close to perfection: catchy hooks, memorable lyrics, Tim Booth's powerful vocals, and the ability to bring me near tears with a mix of sadness and elation.

The Ortofon cartridge wrings out the best of the 90s production - deep bass, the sound of the drums, the jangle of the guitars, and the dynamic contrasts.  This is no audiophile hidden gem since it was probably recorded on early digital equipment with plenty of overdubs and even a few effects.  Nonetheless I've never heard this album sound so right.  I had to tap my toes, smile, and remember my youth with wistful melancholy while being uplifted with the wonders of life.

The swelling and rolling of the bass was impressive and was the precision of the midrange.  The treble was never overly aggressive either.  Again there was a slight lack of body and some minor loss of definition compared to more expensive cartridges, but the Ortofon is really no slump in this department.  I'm looking forward to trying out some different phono stages to see if this area can be improved on.  The Adcom, after all, uses op-amps with high negative feedback and currently has some aged components, so perhaps I'm expecting too much out of this budget unit.


Conclusion: With cartridges it is hard to make blanket recommendations, but with the Dual CS5000 and it's lightweight tonearm, the Ortofon OM 20 bests anything else I've tried on this rather modest turntable.  It certainly is more cohesive than the Shure M97xE, an Audio Technica ATN95HE, and even better than the Nagaoka MP-110.  Of course the Ortofon is a bit more expensive than any one of these cartridges, but what is really happening here is a matter of system matching.  And, as a bonus, the Ortofon OM 20 cartridge can take any number of stylus upgrades which will be worth exploring in the future.

As for the sound of the OM 20, it really did exceed my expectations, bumping my rather pedestrian system up another notch in quality.  Considering the odd blend of gear here - vintage American amplification, small British mini-monitors, and a German turntable and cartridge - the sound is cohesive, engaging, and just touching on the fringes of high-end.  I hate to gush since such proclamations are often viewed with distrust, but, at least with this turntable and system, the Ortofon OM 20 is a real winner.  Highly recommended.


System:
Adcom GFP-555 preamplifier
Adcom GFA-545 amplifier
Dual CS5000 turntable with Shure M97xe phono cartridges
Pioneer DVD-V7400 DVD player
Wharfedale Denton 80th Anniversary speakers
Kimber 8PR/4PR bi-wire speaker cables
various budget interconnect cables

Tube Review: The Mullard XF2 EL34 pentode

Introduction:
The Mullard EL34 - though perhaps not the best sounding of this family of tubes - is famous for a big and rich sound favored by guitarists and hi-fi nuts.  The XF2 version, like many early tubes, has welded plates, along with that thick, dark getter that is a trademark of the valves that rolled out from the Blackburn factory.  Later ones have similar construction but used crimped plates - I've never sat down and compared the different XF models, but needless to say they're all pretty good.

 The Mullard "sound", for whatever reason, has always been on the darker scale than neutrality.  Perhaps there is some secret mojo in the cathode chemistry or the metal quality, but this sound difference is easily noticeable in comparison to an original Philips EL34 or even any modern EL34.  This romantic sound, in the wrong amplifier, can lead to a syrupy sound - I'm thinking of something like a stock Dynaco 70 or any vintage amplifier with weak power supply capacitors and/or oil coupling capacitors.  So, like anything else, system balance is important.

The pair of Mullard XF2 EL34s I'm reviewing here are high mileage units pulled from my Eico HF-60 monoblocks.  Though they have plenty of hours on them, they still test almost as new - longevity is something that vintage tubes seem to do well and is needed, especially when running in something as abusive as the HF-60.  For this amplifier with a plate voltage of 400VDC and a screen of 250VDC, 60mA was chosen as a nice cruising speed.

Listening Tests:
The Immortal Otis Redding has a nice and punchy sound, albeit a tad stripped down.  The Mullards conveyed this simple recording with excellent clarity, depth, and dynamics.  Otis's voice sounded very natural as did the instrumentation.  The sound never became harsh or strident with this output tube.  There was also a nice projection to the vocals, pushing the sound beyond the speakers.  This seems to be a trait of vintage tubes - an enveloping sound with a 3-D effect: layered depth, wide and stable imaging, and a sense of being tangibly involved in the music.

Frank Sinatra - Sinatra at the Sands appears to be a three channel recording with instrumentation on the left and right with Frank right in the middle of the action.  The dynamics - on the right system - are truly breathtaking.  The Mullard EL34 excelled here, sounding almost as big as the Tung Sol 6550.  On the quieter songs like Don't Worry 'bout Me, all the emotion came through with the sensitivity that only Sinatra could surprisingly pull from that playboy act.

The last record in this listening test was Steely Dan - Aja which is a modern recording with deep bass, shifting dynamics, and crafty compositions.  The Mullard EL34 wonderfully captured the trailing edges of the reverberation and gave a soundstage that was big and organic.  The instruments floated nicely in space too.  There was a touch of darkness to the music, giving a not quite neutral sound compared to a Tung Sol 6550 or the ultra-vividness of the Philips metal base.

Conclusion:
The Mullard EL34, compared to the new production tubes I've heard, has a real magic.  The music flows with more ease - a naturalness that is hard to describe, but the sound that is reproduced is cut from the same cloth in a grain-free way that makes me forget that I'm listening to a stereo.  Even the Shuguang GEKT88 - which is very good - doesn't capture this ability of convey the real soul of the recording.

However, the Mullard is not the most hyper-detailed and bends the signal to a darker, more romantic spectrum.  But this is a nice place to be - especially in the world of hot digital recordings and aggressive moving-coils.  If you're searching for the most transparent or an abundance of detail, then this may not be the tube for you.  But - and this varies from listener to listener - any sins are easy to forgive.  This is a tube for the music lover, not the nitpicker. 

Tube Review: The Reflektor 6P3S-E power tetrode and the Sovtek 5881

Introduction:
Way back in my college days, I used to own a Harman-Kardon Citation V amplifier, which was supposed to use 7581 output tubes.  At the time those were rarer than GEC KT66s, so I ended up running RCA black-plate 6L6GCs which had the misfortune of being on the edge of their max dissipation.  A red line would appear right along the plate seam, at the time making me nervous as hell.  The only inexpensive tube that could take the heat was the newly introduced Sovtek 5881.  It wasn't the best sounding tube but it certainly could take the abuse.

The 1970s era 6P3S-E - except for the shinier getter - looks exactly the Sovtek 5881, but the former has become a sort of budget audiophile darling while the latter is known as a rugged guitar tube.  I was curious to see how the 6P3S-E would sound, and at roughly $24 shipped for a pair, I thought it was a perfect tube to try out in the Multi-Valve amplifier which had adjustable fixed bias - needed for dialing in a larger number of popular octal power valves.

Since I also have a pair of newer 5881s on hand, I also decided to compare the two.  Physically they appear to be the same tube - rather business-like - but perhaps the cathode chemistry or even the plate metal quality is different enough to make a real world difference.  Let's find out!

Note: 6P3S-Es were burned in for approximately fifty hours before listening.  The Sovtek 5881s have been used for regulator service and for testing new amplifiers - hours are unknown but definitely more than a hundred.

Listening to the 6P3S-E:
Blue Nile - Hats is a rare vinyl treat with swooping synthesizers and melancholy lyrics.  It isn't the most natural sounding album but has great dynamics and a dramatic soundstage.  Through the 6P3S-E, there seemed to be a touch of iciness - perhaps an artifact of the recording - but I've heard more richness with other output tubes, notably many NOS units like the Mullard EL34 or the Tung Sol 6550.  But still, the 63PS-E has a good transparency which will be loved by many modern music listeners who grew up with solid-state gear.

Next up was the half-speed master of Willie Nelson - Stardust.  Detail was very good, though not the best I heard.  It was the kind of fake detail caused by excessive treble.  Once again I was reminded of a good, but slightly aggressive solid-state amplifier.  Perhaps this tube would be a better match with some paper tweeters or a dull front end, but with a horn tweeter and a moving-coil cartridge the sound was rather forward.  Bass depth and control, however, was quite good as was transparency.  I wish I could combine the 6P3S-E with the darker sound of a Mullard XF2 EL34.  That would give a more ideal tube.

I dug out my copy of Steely Dan - Pretzel Logic and gave it a spin.  The treble energy didn't seem as hot on this album, but once again I heard a slight sterility to the sound.  It wasn't bad - but the 6P3S-E seemed to falsely increase detail by cranking up the treble, adding some glassiness.  The sound didn't really breathe at least not with the musicality I expect from the very best of the NOS tubes.  I didn't get carried away with the music either, not even the soaring vocals of the song Barrytown.

Listening to the Sovtek 5881:
After some warmup I started with side two of The Grateful Dead - Terrapin Station, which is a very unique "rock opera" type piece.  Once again the forward nature of this tube was evident.  I'm thinking if I had an A/B switch box I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between this and the 6P3S-E.  It had the same tipped up top-end, clean mids and good bass control.

In the right system, Cat Power - Jukebox has a big "you are there" sound.  With the 5881, the effect was lessened, losing some of the inner-detail and the lowest, full bass.  Again, it was good but the big DEPTH was shortened, making a flatter, less involving soundstage without the shimmer and swirl of the best output tubes.  If there were differences between this and the 6P3S-E, they were incredibly minor.  Just to be sure, it was time to return to a record I have already listened to.

Once again I gave Willie Nelson - Stardust a listen.  Perhaps it was listener fatigue or system break-in, but I would swear the treble was actually tamer than the 6P3S-E.  The mids were also a tad richer too.  Both tubes, however, were still cut from the same sonic cloth - perhaps the difference between a Mullard XF2 and a XF3: different but not extremely so.

Conclusion:
The 63PS-E or Sovtek 5881 aren't bad tubes, but they aren't great tubes.  They certainly aren't very neutral, hewing to a brighter sound than I like.  They have a forward "in your face" sort of character that may be a better match for vintage speakers or certain MM cartridges.  At least in my system, I wouldn't use them - not while I'm running compression driver/horn tweeters and a moving-coil cartridge.  They are, however, recommended for budget audiophiles, but with serious system matching caveats.  As always, YMMV.


Review System:
VPI Aries with JMW 10.5i tonearm and SDS Power Supply
Dynavector 10X5
Cardas Cross 1M interconnects
Quicksilver preamplifier with Mullard short-plate 12AX7s, RCA 12FQ7s, Amperex 12AU7
Cardas Quadlink 5C 1M interconnects
Multi-Valve Stereo amplifier
Cardas Hexlink speaker cable
UREI 813A monitor speakers
VTI BL503 equipment rack 

Review: Monoprice MHP-839 headphones

(image from Google)

Having never spent more than a $79 on a pair, I'm a admitted headphone cheapskate.  For work, I'm a longtime user of the budget Sennheiser HD-201, while for home use, the Grado SR60s get the nod.  At heart I will remain a speaker guy since the visceral gut impact of something like the UREI 813As just can't be matched even by the finest headphones.  But for listening to MP3s at my desk or while doing late night mixdowns of my amateur synth music, it's hard to beat the sonic solitude of a pair of headphones.

When I finally decided to give up the Sennheiser HD-201s, a good audiophile friend recommended the Monoprice MHP-839s.  He's a longtime Sennheiser HD-600 user, but commented that the Monoprice headphones were quite enjoyable with a nice overall sound for the price.  I ordered my pair from Amazon - hey, free shipping! - and got them a few days later.

After a few hours of break-in, I found the Monoprice headphones to be quite decent.  The lowest bass goes quite deep with more impact and slam than the old HD-201s.  They also have a richer midrange, making the Sennheisers sound a bit nasal and hollow.  Perhaps the Monoprices are a tad congested - for example, sounding like a doped paper woofer than something like Kevlar.  Their biggest failing is in the treble.  My middle-aged ears don't quite hear the higher frequencies like they used to, but even I could hear a steep roll-off here.  This isn't a big deal for MP3 sources or anything that was recorded a little on the hot side - like many Synth or Dance mixes, but could be a deal breaker for the serious audiophile.  With their open back design, I prefer the Grado SR60s - they have a clarity that is hard to beat for the price - but such a design wouldn't work for my workplace.

As far as design, the Monoprice headphones aren't quite as comfortable as the Sennheisers.  I notice my ears getting hotter quicker.  I have a fairly large noggin though, so perhaps I'm stretching the band pretty hard.  Compared to the HD-201s, the background noise of a busy office is muted more with the Monoprices.  This is good if you require noise suppression like I do - programming takes concentration.

Construction quality is good - these headphones are built with heavy-duty plastic.  The two different lengths of supplied cords are a nice touch.