Audiokarma.org
Audiokarma Featured Sponsor

Go Back   AudioKarma.org Home Audio Stereo Discussion Forums > Turntables


We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-05-2010, 08:47 AM
jimdandy's Avatar
jimdandy jimdandy is offline
Receiver or wife - hmm...
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Middle of USA
Posts: 644
Cambridge Audio 540p phono stage vs. Marantz 2245 phono stage

Thought I'd post this as I've read a few threads wondering if a new seperate phono stage would sound better than a phono stage from a vintage receiver.

I honestly could not tell the difference between my Marantz 2245 phono stage and the 540p. Now, the 2245 has been completely restored by AK member Catrafter and I've only been listening to the 540p for a couple days. Apparently, there is a break-in period for new phono pre-amps. But as of now, they're on the same level as far as I can hear (they both sound good).

I will say the 540p sounds much better than the phono stage in my new Yamaha AX-497 integrated amp and that is where I'm using it.

Just thought I'd share my experience.
__________________
Receiver: Marantz 2245 among others
Turntables: Pioneer PL-516, PL-518
Speakers:Boston Acoustic A100, Klipsch KG-4, DLK 2, DLK 1.5, Paradigm Monitor 7
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-29-2010, 02:29 PM
DrMux DrMux is offline
Welcome to the Gig.
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Drexel Lake, SC
Posts: 849
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimdandy View Post
Thought I'd post this as I've read a few threads wondering if a new seperate phono stage would sound better than a phono stage from a vintage receiver.

I honestly could not tell the difference between my Marantz 2245 phono stage and the 540p. Now, the 2245 has been completely restored by AK member Catrafter and I've only been listening to the 540p for a couple days. Apparently, there is a break-in period for new phono pre-amps. But as of now, they're on the same level as far as I can hear (they both sound good).

I will say the 540p sounds much better than the phono stage in my new Yamaha AX-497 integrated amp and that is where I'm using it.

Just thought I'd share my experience.
I'm interested in phono stages myself. I've been looking into different models under $200. I was pretty much set on a tube model for $175, but Audio Advisor tech tells me the NAD PP2 would be the way to go. At this point I have no idea but will keep looking and reading. Right now I'm using a Pioneer SX-780 but could really used the space it's taking up for something else so I can run them through my tube power amp.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-29-2010, 02:40 PM
HypnoToad's Avatar
HypnoToad HypnoToad is offline
Miss Puss Puss
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,988
I have a 540P and it sounds better than the one in my Yamaha CR-1020 and Luxman L-430 but can't compete with my ProJect Tube Box II but that's in a different price range.

For the price its a good unit and the 640P is supposed to be even better.
__________________
No Good Deed Goes Unpunished - Clare Boothe Luce
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-29-2010, 02:43 PM
JohnVF JohnVF is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimdandy View Post
Thought I'd post this as I've read a few threads wondering if a new seperate phono stage would sound better than a phono stage from a vintage receiver.

I honestly could not tell the difference between my Marantz 2245 phono stage and the 540p. Now, the 2245 has been completely restored by AK member Catrafter and I've only been listening to the 540p for a couple days. Apparently, there is a break-in period for new phono pre-amps. But as of now, they're on the same level as far as I can hear (they both sound good).

I will say the 540p sounds much better than the phono stage in my new Yamaha AX-497 integrated amp and that is where I'm using it.

Just thought I'd share my experience.
The cartridge, turntable before the pre as well as the resolution of the amp and speakers after it will also play into how much of a difference you notice between phono preamps. I'm not dissing your gear...it just may be that a phono pre of the quality of that in the 2245 is exactly on par with your cartridge, turntable, amp and speakers. Or it could be exactly as you described, that the two phono pres are of equal quality...

There are so many variables in what we all run.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-29-2010, 02:43 PM
DrMux DrMux is offline
Welcome to the Gig.
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Drexel Lake, SC
Posts: 849
I just found this link. I'm getting the one rated against the NAD. Price is better. And I like to try something different.

http://phonopreamps.com/
Reply With Quote
Audiokarma
  #6  
Old 03-29-2010, 02:55 PM
MWalt's Avatar
MWalt MWalt is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NE OHIO
Posts: 4,619
Hmmmm...surprising. I have the 640p as well as a fully restored 2245 and the Cambridge was better. Much better. Not dissing the 2245, but also I found this to be the case with my Marantz 1060, Kenwood KA-9100 and my Pioneer SA-8800. All my vintage stuff have phono sections that sound nice, but none compared at all with the 640P. The 640P does spec better than the 540p though.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-29-2010, 03:54 PM
fastbike fastbike is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: North Texas, USA
Posts: 831
I'm very surprised the AA rep recommended the NAD instead of the Cambridge 640p.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMux View Post
I'm interested in phono stages myself. I've been looking into different models under $200. I was pretty much set on a tube model for $175, but Audio Advisor tech tells me the NAD PP2 would be the way to go. At this point I have no idea but will keep looking and reading. Right now I'm using a Pioneer SX-780 but could really used the space it's taking up for something else so I can run them through my tube power amp.
__________________
I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-29-2010, 04:01 PM
ohenry ohenry is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMux View Post
I just found this link. I'm getting the one rated against the NAD. Price is better. And I like to try something different.

http://phonopreamps.com/
It will be interesting to see what you think of it. I bought one for my girlfriend and I was impressed, but I wasn't willing or able to compare it with other preamps in her system.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-29-2010, 04:24 PM
Stanton681EEES's Avatar
Stanton681EEES Stanton681EEES is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 6,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMux View Post
I just found this link. I'm getting the one rated against the NAD. Price is better. And I like to try something different.

http://phonopreamps.com/
Get yourself a Cambridge 640P it will kill either of the ones you mentioned.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-29-2010, 06:09 PM
vinyl1's Avatar
vinyl1 vinyl1 is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimdandy View Post
I will say the 540p sounds much better than the phono stage in my new Yamaha AX-497 integrated amp and that is where I'm using it.

Just thought I'd share my experience.
Wouldn't you have to plug the 540p into the Marantz to get a fair comparison? The phono stage may not be the only thing in the Yamaha that is crappy.
Reply With Quote
Audiokarma
  #11  
Old 03-29-2010, 06:28 PM
JohnVF JohnVF is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,128
The DB Systems DB-8 phono pre (available only online or, in my case, very nice fellow AKer) destroyed my NAD pp-2 sonically. Nothing against the PP-2, as it in turn was better than almost all my built in phono pres, but it is not the go-to pre as that link described.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-29-2010, 07:32 PM
bsujeep's Avatar
bsujeep bsujeep is offline
Go Boise State!!!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 1,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMux View Post
I just found this link. I'm getting the one rated against the NAD. Price is better. And I like to try something different.

http://phonopreamps.com/
Interesting, I borrowed a TC-750 from a friend to use until I save up for a tube phono pre. We hooked it up to some very nice equipment (sumiko blackbird, promitheus TVC SE, DIY EL84 SET amp, and crites upgraded Khorns) to give it a shot and it surprised both of us. It was not up to the Graham Slee era gold, but was very listenable.

I took it home and noticed a pretty good buzz from the wall wart it comes with and got a goofy idea that worked very nicely. I used an old computer power supply and cut off an old wall wart that had the same size pin for the TC-750 and wired it to the 12 volt rails on the computer power supply. Very quiet now with just a faint hum at max volume that I can only hear right next to the woofer. It won't compete with high dollar stuff, but it beats all the built in's that I have.
__________________
Everyday: Kenwood KD600, Black Widow, V15III
Serious: Thorens TD125, SME3009, Blackbird (SS)

Thorens Owners Group
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-29-2010, 10:13 PM
avole avole is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,035
I thought the PP2 was nothing special - shut in sound, not particularly dynamic, al in all a bit grey. The basic Pro-ject was better, but the Fono mini was easily the best.

Have just bought the 640p as the mini is MM only. According to the tests in the German HiFi mags which rate for quality irrespective of budget it's up there with the best and much, much better than the PP3.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-29-2010, 10:18 PM
Netdewt Netdewt is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanton681EEES View Post
Get yourself a Cambridge 640P it will kill either of the ones you mentioned.
Everyone says this. I have the 540P and I like it a lot. First TT and first phono pre. It was cheap enough that I can get something else later. I will never run a MC cart, I'm too cheap, so I don't care about the better specs on the 640P. Why does everyone bother recommending a phono pre way outside the given price range?

I think it depends on what you want it for.
__________________
Jolida 202A, Klipsch KG4, BJC Ten, Dual 1228, Cambridge 540P, Sony XDR-F1HD, Airport Express, Grado SR125
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-30-2010, 06:05 AM
MWalt's Avatar
MWalt MWalt is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NE OHIO
Posts: 4,619
Quote:
Originally Posted by Netdewt View Post
Everyone says this. I have the 540P and I like it a lot. First TT and first phono pre. It was cheap enough that I can get something else later. I will never run a MC cart, I'm too cheap, so I don't care about the better specs on the 640P. Why does everyone bother recommending a phono pre way outside the given price range?

I think it depends on what you want it for.
Simply because the 640P sounds better than the 540P. Thus, the better specs. If the the 540 is priced right for you and works for you then great. You are not comparing apples to apples with the 640 and 540.
Reply With Quote
Audiokarma
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:54 PM.



Friends of Audiokarma
We appreciate your help in keeping this site going.
Wargos Electronics
Amps and Sound
Sonneteer
Organ Donor Parts
Sound Stage Direct
Parts Connexion
AudioClassics
Atlantic Systems
AV Solutions
Take Five Audio
Tone Arm Audio
Audio Salon
Musical Paradise
Audience AV
Classic Sound Repair
Simply Speakers
McIntosh Cabinets
BD Enterprise
Cabledyne
Howard Products
BOI Audio Works
FM DX Antenna
Amplifiedparts
Siliconray
RSL Speakers
Vinyl Magic Record Cleaner
Urban Antigue Radio
Grant Fidelity
Many Moons Audio
Yesterday's Audio
The Tube Store
DeWick Repairs
Audio Doctor
Vintage Electronics Repair
MCM Electronics
Politicalchat.org
Herbies Audio Lab
Antique Radio Classifieds
 
Videokarma.org
   
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ęCopyright 2002-2014 AudioKarma.org, All rights reserved.