Modding the Harman Kardon 730 phono stage

dyche01

"Buy high. Sell low"
About a year ago I bought a sweet little HK730 receiver from a beloved HK'er in the Bay Area, @sberger. After some routine cleaning and maintenance, which included upgrading the power supply and sub-rectifier capacitors, the unit sounded really sweet. It also looks quite spiffy:

HK730_corner_sm.jpg

The tuner pulls in signal like crazy and the 40-watt, dual-mono amplifier is crystal clear, with just a hint of that 70's era warmth that you hear so much about. My only complaint is that I am not wild about the phono stage, which seems dull and lifeless. After browsing the internets I was gratified to find at least one other person who loves the rest of the HK730 more than its phono preamp (http://www.amcanaudio.com/?p=788).

Lately I have been running the turntable through an outboard ProJect phono stage and a Schiit passive preamp (on the shelf below the receiver in the photo below).
HK730_projectschiit_sm.jpg

This is an okay solution but I wondered whether I could do something to improve my enjoyment of the HK730 preamp. I bought one on eBay from a seller who was parting out a dead HK730 (tragic!) so that I could play around with it. Here is a photo of the board (partially recapped).
HK730_phonotop_sm.jpg

I couldn't find any frequency response curves online so I used the schematic in the HK730 manual to construct a circuit model in a browser-based simulation package, called Partsim. If you are a nerd about these things, Partsim is basically a simple version of SPICE with a nice front end and a link to the Parts Express catalog. The program is free and I am happy to share the model with anyone else out there who wants to try their hand at modding this pre-amp. Here is the circuit:
HK730_phono_pre.jpg

The big capacitors, C721 and C722, were not actually on the schematic and their position came from looking at the board itself. It is clear that they are just there to filter out noise in B+ and B-, and so they don't do anything in this simulation. The transistors are standard, small-signal BJT models and the components are marked with the numbering scheme of the left channel, according to the HK730 manual. After a bit of debugging I got the circuit to do what it was supposed to do. Here, then, is the frequency response that the HK730 phono-preamp was designed to have:

HK730_RIAA_sm.jpg

In the above graph, the HK730 response curve (green) is plotted together with the original RIAA standard curve (dashed black line). They are pretty much dead on top of each other until you get down below 60 Hz, where the HK730 starts to roll off pretty quickly. This roll off reminded me of the modified RIAA curve that the Swiss introduced sometime in the 70's, which is usually called the IEC or RIAA/IEC response curve. I found data for that curve online too and included it in the plot:
HK730_RIAA_IEC_sm.jpg
My understanding (from reading nerdy blog posts) is that the IEC response curve was never very popular and was positively reviled by audiophiles (http://www.stereophile.com/features/cut_and_thrust_riaa_lp_equalization/#7xH3ttVqkQoKm2iY.97). The recording industry did not modify its pre-emphasis to fit the new curve, so pre-amps that use it actually introduce low frequency distortion BY DESIGN. For some reason, it looks like HK designed this pre-amp using the IEC curve, and actually, if you look closely, the HK response curve rolls off a bit faster at low frequencies than the IEC standard curve.

The power of having a circuit model and a SPICE-based simulation program is that you can tweak parameters to your heart's content, so I started looking for a minimal tweak that I could make to the circuit that would push the response curve up toward the old RIAA standard. In the end, bumping up two capacitor values by a factor of 10 (C716 from 0.039 to 0.33 µF and C718 from 0.1 to 1.0 µF) pushed the up the low-frequency response to match the old RIAA standard almost exactly.
HK730_original_mod_sm.jpg
The other simple tweaks I decided to make were to: (1) increase the B+/B- filter capacitance from 220 to 470 µF and (2) replace the associated filter resistors (which set the rail voltage for the entire circuit) with precision, mil. spec., metal film resistors.
cap_comp_sm.jpg


If you are interested in trying this out at home, here is a marked schematic that should make it easy-peasy.

HK730_preamp_marked.jpg

Actually, before you run out and do this, maybe you should check back in a day or so, after I have popped the modified board into the unit and given it a listen.
 
Last edited:
Amazing work my friend. Hats off to you totally.
Here is a semi related question.
In partsim - can you enter a circuit and put in say the symptom of the problem and will it help you narrow down the defective component.
I should look into it I guess. But say a transistor was bad, and you put in the symptom, DC is 5v at this terminal, can it tell you to go check this transistor - that type.
Thanks.
Srinath.
 
Amazing work my friend. Hats off to you totally.
Here is a semi related question.
In partsim - can you enter a circuit and put in say the symptom of the problem and will it help you narrow down the defective component.
I should look into it I guess. But say a transistor was bad, and you put in the symptom, DC is 5v at this terminal, can it tell you to go check this transistor - that type.
Thanks.
Srinath.

Thanks!

Partsim --and SPICE-based simulations in general-- are really good for troubleshooting designs, but not much use in finding bad components. For that, you would probably need some sort of machine-learning algorithm that runs lots and lots of SPICE simulations, testing the effect of every possible fault in the circuit against the description provided. For many important systems the users and designers have developed explicit 'fault trees' and this is kind of what a good electronics technician does. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fault_tree_analysis
 
I also looked at the phase behavior of the original and modified phono circuits. Here is the phase shift in degrees.

phase_shift.jpg

And here is the resultant timing shift.

time_shift.jpg

Interestingly, the circuit modification also significantly improves the low frequency phase error. This wouldn't have been a surprise if I had known more about phono equalization curves before I started. According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIAA_equalization): "This so-called IEC Amendment to the RIAA curve is not universally seen as desirable, as it introduces considerable amplitude and—of more concern—phase errors into the low-frequency response during playback."

The Swiss have a lot to answer for in creating and touting the IEC-RIAA curve. And HK, what were you thinking?
 
Last edited:
Very nice! One question, and not trying to detract from what you did at all, but why replace the tantalum with another tantalum? Some, including myself would have used a nice film or low ESR electrolytic. I think you did good digging in to why the phono sounded off and being able to correct it so well. :thumbsup:
 
Thanks!

I went with the tantalum just to be conservative. If I keep playing around with the circuit, I might try out a good Nichicon electrolytic.
 
Very nice! One question, and not trying to detract from what you did at all, but why replace the tantalum with another tantalum? Some, including myself would have used a nice film or low ESR electrolytic. I think you did good digging in to why the phono sounded off and being able to correct it so well. :thumbsup:

Okay, so you changed my mind. Before installing the board, I swapped the 1 µF tantalum for a nice Nichicon electrolytic capacitor. I also bumped up the value of the film capacitors C715/716 to 0.47 µF. Boosting the original value by 10X would have required a 0.39 µF, but I only have 0.33 and 0.47. I went with the larger value to push the low frequency pole a bit farther to the left.
finished_board.jpg

Last night I popped the modified board into the receiver and this morning I started listening to it. The short answer is that I am VERY pleased with this phono stage. The sound is noticeably smoother and richer and is now starting to flesh out the lower registers of my IMF speakers.

hk730_insitu_sm.jpg
I think the modified HK might now outperform the outboard phono-preamp that I have been using. I am always wary of subjective impressions like this, so I will try to rig up a direct A/B comparison later today.
 
Nice work! I have a few stacks of early to mid '70's Marantz seperates and integrateds ive restored. You have given me a few ideas for one of the integrated amps. Most of the phono boards sound pretty nice, but the one in a little 15wpc 1030 integrated sounds rather dull to me. Thanks for posting the thread!
 
Thanks! Good luck, and post your results.

I just set up an A/B test by running the signal 'backward' through the Schiit passive pre-amp. This way I could take the single output from the turntable and switch it between the phono input on the HK730 and the ProJect box. I then sent the output of the ProJect box into one of the aux inputs of the receiver. This seemed like the fairest way to do the comparison.

AB_test.jpg

Using Ella Fitzgerald, Dizzy Gillespie, and Steely Dan records as test subjects I am happy to report that the HK board noticeably outperformed the ProJect box. The main differences were what I would call 'depth' and 'richness' of the sound (I am no good at describing my subjective impressions of sound quality; I can't describe good wine either). I am officially declaring victory and moving on.
 
Very cool.

I wonder if the 430 has the same phono stage?

I have one that I recapped and replaced all the small signal transistors in. Phono stage is ok, but doesn't WOW me like the rest of the unit.
 
Interesting. This circuit is a bit simpler in that it uses a single-rail voltage source and only two transistors.

Also, the B+ voltage rail is connected to the two channels by two separate drop-down resistors and two filter capacitors. You could safely replace R721/722 with precision 1% metal foil resistors of the same value (3.3 kOhm) and you could bump up the capacitance of C717/718 from 100 µF to at least 220 µF. This might have a noticeable effect on the performance. If I have time I will compute the response curve and see whether this circuit also follows the IEC-RIAA curve.

hk430combo_circuit_marked.jpg

And, by the way, I now love the modified HK730 phono stage so much that I have officially retired the outboard ProJect phono box (at least from this system).
 
Last edited:
Interesting. This circuit is a bit simpler in that it uses a single-rail voltage source and only two transistors.

Also, the B+ voltage rail is connected to the two channels by two separate drop-down resistors and two filter capacitors. You could safely replace R721/722 with precision 1% metal foil resistors of the same value (3.3 kOhm) and you could bump up the capacitance of C717/718 from 100 µF to at least 220 µF. This might have a noticeable effect on the performance. If I have time I will compute the response curve and see whether this circuit also follows the IEC-RIAA curve.

View attachment 926061

And, by the way, I now love the modified HK730 phono stage so much that I have officially retired the outboard ProJect phono box (at least from this system).

Yeah, if you have time to mess around with it that would be great. I did check out PartSim, but learning curve got in the way. It would be interesting to get your take on it.

I did recap the phono stage at same time I recapped preamp board (electrolytics only). Also replaced the 4 transistors with new low noise ones (forgot what with, have it written down somewhere). Afterwards the phono stage got a lot quieter.
 
Okay, my obsessive tendencies are starting to get the better of me. I just sat down and plugged the HK430 circuit into PartSim and ran a quick frequency response. This circuit has about 2.5 dB less gain overall than the HK730 circuit but, more interestingly, it does not follow the crazy IEC curve but almost exactly matches the original RIAA de-emphasis curve. So, it looks like the IEC modification only appears in the model 730.

HK730_HK430.jpg

Does anybody know the dates of manufacture of these two units? From what I see online it looks like both were introduced in 1976 (the year that the IEC-RIAA curve was introduced).

The HK730 equalization circuit is more complex, with three transistors (and three poles) compared to the two transistor (and apparently two pole) design of the HK430 phono circuit. I wonder if the low frequency roll off was considered an added 'feature'.
 
Okay, my obsessive tendencies are starting to get the better of me. I just sat down and plugged the HK430 circuit into PartSim and ran a quick frequency response. This circuit has about 2.5 dB less gain overall than the HK730 circuit but, more interestingly, it does not follow the crazy IEC curve but almost exactly matches the original RIAA de-emphasis curve. So, it looks like the IEC modification only appears in the model 730.

View attachment 926844

Does anybody know the dates of manufacture of these two units? From what I see online it looks like both were introduced in 1976 (the year that the IEC-RIAA curve was introduced).

The HK730 equalization circuit is more complex, with three transistors (and three poles) compared to the two transistor (and apparently two pole) design of the HK430 phono circuit. I wonder if the low frequency roll off was considered an added 'feature'.

Thanks for doing that! Audio-nervosa avoided. I should probably give the phono stage another shot with a good set up.

No help on the dates. Mine has production code of 6196, serial number 25950.
 
dyche01, that's VERY impressive work! I have an HK 730 that I picked up in somewhat rough shape for $10 a while back. It had it looking and sounding good until I lent it to a friend of mine and her daughter's friends broke a couple of switches. I'll fix those. Your work has motivated me to move the 730 higher on the "To Do" stack and see if your mods sound as good in mine.

Thanks for doing and sharing this good work.
 
Back
Top Bottom