Hello everybody,
this is my first message on this forum, starting a new topic of something in hifi business that always have puzzled me:
Why are mono pre-amps or mono phono stages so hard to find?
The inconvenience with separate volume controls for each channel can now be overcome by using remote control.
Matching the two channels maybe an issue, and such amps should be sold in matched pairs. Expensive procedures of course, but excessive pricing have never hindered manufacturers in this business before.
Some "maniaks" are using double Lintos for example.
Thanks
Stellan Holgersson
Mono pre-amp
Moderator: Staff
As one of the "maniaks" referred to I'll give a shot to an answer.
There are a few distinct benefits to going monoblock with power amplifiers. Because power amps have to generate a lot of current to drive the speakers they have to have fairly large power supplies (especially if they are linear types). To put a lot of power out into two channels doubles the size of the power supply for the same performance and also leads to concerns over the channels modulating each other through the power supply so even better filtering or regulation may be needed. Cooling is another concern that requires a larger chassis to allow enough heat sink area. Going with separate chassis eliminates any of these concerns and allows for a much smaller chassis for the same performance. Look at the Klimax amps: the stereo version puts our about 100 Watts per channel into 8 Ohms, the mono puts our 290!
Also having mono amps allows the amps to be placed closer to the speakers with short speaker cables and long interconnects. This is the recommended way to wire things in Linn systems.
When you are dealing with a preamp or phono stage you are handling much smaller signals and don't need anywhere near as much current from the power supply so the size of the unit is not an issue (despite Naim's love of big power supplies). In addition the circuits themselves are generally smaller and don't need the same level of cooling. This means that there really is no need for separate mono chassis. Combine this with the tendency for most music lovers to want fewer boxes rather than more and the need to control both channels together (volume, balance, input switching, etc.) and you can see why mono preamps or phono stages are an unlikely product.
So this begs the question: Why 2 Lintos? Because Lintos do not have a mono construction internally there is an advantage to having one unit for each channel. As Linn has shown with the Klimax Kontrol upgrade, something as simple as having separate volume controls for each channel can make a substantial improvement by reducing noise and distortion. The separation of the channels with two Lintos works on the same theory. But, in keeping with the above comments. two Lintos would not be necessary if the Linto was true dual mono internally. If you look inside a Linto you will see that there is way more than enough room to put two separate phono sections in there. (Indeed you could make the world's first 8 channel phono stage in that box if you wanted to.) If Linn simply put two Linto phono stages in the box with one channel on each you would likely get all the benefit of two Lintos as my guess is that the power supply would be perfectly effective driving both cards. If you really wanted to go over the top you could even put two power supplies in it - you would still have plenty of room left over. With the level of power supply sophistication that Linn have achieved in their SMPS I don't think there is any real advantage to separate power supplies for each channel (but I could be wrong). With the exception of the single power supply the new Klimax Kontrol really is a dual mono circuit already. So I really don't expect monoblock preamps to be the next rage.
But how about monoblock LP12s? Think of the sonic separation and reduction of distortion with completely isolated cartridges/arms/turntables! :)
There are a few distinct benefits to going monoblock with power amplifiers. Because power amps have to generate a lot of current to drive the speakers they have to have fairly large power supplies (especially if they are linear types). To put a lot of power out into two channels doubles the size of the power supply for the same performance and also leads to concerns over the channels modulating each other through the power supply so even better filtering or regulation may be needed. Cooling is another concern that requires a larger chassis to allow enough heat sink area. Going with separate chassis eliminates any of these concerns and allows for a much smaller chassis for the same performance. Look at the Klimax amps: the stereo version puts our about 100 Watts per channel into 8 Ohms, the mono puts our 290!
Also having mono amps allows the amps to be placed closer to the speakers with short speaker cables and long interconnects. This is the recommended way to wire things in Linn systems.
When you are dealing with a preamp or phono stage you are handling much smaller signals and don't need anywhere near as much current from the power supply so the size of the unit is not an issue (despite Naim's love of big power supplies). In addition the circuits themselves are generally smaller and don't need the same level of cooling. This means that there really is no need for separate mono chassis. Combine this with the tendency for most music lovers to want fewer boxes rather than more and the need to control both channels together (volume, balance, input switching, etc.) and you can see why mono preamps or phono stages are an unlikely product.
So this begs the question: Why 2 Lintos? Because Lintos do not have a mono construction internally there is an advantage to having one unit for each channel. As Linn has shown with the Klimax Kontrol upgrade, something as simple as having separate volume controls for each channel can make a substantial improvement by reducing noise and distortion. The separation of the channels with two Lintos works on the same theory. But, in keeping with the above comments. two Lintos would not be necessary if the Linto was true dual mono internally. If you look inside a Linto you will see that there is way more than enough room to put two separate phono sections in there. (Indeed you could make the world's first 8 channel phono stage in that box if you wanted to.) If Linn simply put two Linto phono stages in the box with one channel on each you would likely get all the benefit of two Lintos as my guess is that the power supply would be perfectly effective driving both cards. If you really wanted to go over the top you could even put two power supplies in it - you would still have plenty of room left over. With the level of power supply sophistication that Linn have achieved in their SMPS I don't think there is any real advantage to separate power supplies for each channel (but I could be wrong). With the exception of the single power supply the new Klimax Kontrol really is a dual mono circuit already. So I really don't expect monoblock preamps to be the next rage.
But how about monoblock LP12s? Think of the sonic separation and reduction of distortion with completely isolated cartridges/arms/turntables! :)
Welcome, Stellan!
I disagree with some of what Thomas writes (for a change! :)).
While the power and heat aspects may dominate the advantages of going mono in the power amps, increased sensitivity is a perfectly valid reason to go mono in the previous stages.
Slipsik and Kinki phono preamps are both built as two mono channels in one box. Kikkin isn't, but the only reason for that is to keep its price as low as possible.
I am working on several other mono constructions and believe that it's usually the preferable way to go (cost aspects ignored). There can be exceptions, but the main reason mono isn't more common is in my opinion:
* Tradition - there's a risk your products will be regarded as extreme
* The demonstrable difference isn't big enough to warrant the higher price
I disagree with some of what Thomas writes (for a change! :)).
While the power and heat aspects may dominate the advantages of going mono in the power amps, increased sensitivity is a perfectly valid reason to go mono in the previous stages.
Slipsik and Kinki phono preamps are both built as two mono channels in one box. Kikkin isn't, but the only reason for that is to keep its price as low as possible.
I am working on several other mono constructions and believe that it's usually the preferable way to go (cost aspects ignored). There can be exceptions, but the main reason mono isn't more common is in my opinion:
* Tradition - there's a risk your products will be regarded as extreme
* The demonstrable difference isn't big enough to warrant the higher price
Seriously, Thomas, I think this could be unbelievably good if the speed and time difference issues could be sorted out. Preferably the records should be manufactured as twin mono recordings, one left channel disc and one right channel disc.ThomasOK wrote:But how about monoblock LP12s? Think of the sonic separation and reduction of distortion with completely isolated cartridges/arms/turntables! :)
Toss me a million and I'll happily spend a few years perfecting it all. Perhaps four interlinked mono Uddevallas driving the two motors? The Akivas will certainly have to be true mono versions. I'll make sure a bunch of your favourite records are manufactured in the new Twin Mono Vinyl (TMV) format! :D
You disagree less than you think! :) I agree with you on the benefits of mono construction (or what I referred to as dual mono). While the Slipsik and Kinki have two mono channels in one box they don't use two separate boxes and transformers - which is what it seemed to me Stellan was asking about. If I remember correctly the Kinki even uses a single board (although I wouldn't put any wagers on my memory lately :( ). As I stated, I believe that the Klimax Knotrol uses mono construction for the audio stages and Linn has used mono construction in many products starting as early as the LK2 power amp. Many other companies do as well. But I don't know of anyone making mono preamps or phono stages where you buy two separate single channel boxes and tie them together. (Once agian with the exception of the 2 Linto maniaks which is not something Linn pushes.) I just don't think there is a need or a market for two single channel boxes outside of power amps. It is much more common to see separate boxes for the audio sections and the power supply to improve isolation.lejonklou wrote:Welcome, Stellan!
I disagree with some of what Thomas writes (for a change! :)).
While the power and heat aspects may dominate the advantages of going mono in the power amps, increased sensitivity is a perfectly valid reason to go mono in the previous stages.
Slipsik and Kinki phono preamps are both built as two mono channels in one box. Kikkin isn't, but the only reason for that is to keep its price as low as possible.
I am working on several other mono constructions and believe that it's usually the preferable way to go (cost aspects ignored). There can be exceptions, but the main reason mono isn't more common is in my opinion:
* Tradition - there's a risk your products will be regarded as extreme
* The demonstrable difference isn't big enough to warrant the higher price
Your heads are full of broken biscuits (or cookies as you say in the US!)Lejonklou wrote:ThomasOK wrote:But how about monoblock LP12s? Think of the sonic separation and reduction of distortion with completely isolated cartridges/arms/turntables!
Seriously, Thomas, I think this could be unbelievably good if the speed and time difference issues could be sorted out. Preferably the records should be manufactured as twin mono recordings, one left channel disc and one right channel disc.
True. Separate boxes and power supplies would make them even better, but there's a cost penalty that's a bit discouraging. With products that are aimed at the very top end of the market, cost is less of an issue. Therefore mono constructions make the most sense there.While the Slipsik and Kinki have two mono channels in one box they don't use two separate boxes and transformers
If the result is higher sound quality, there will be a need and a market. Don't you agree? Then it's just a matter of who will be the first to go down that route and prove that it's worth it.I just don't think there is a need or a market for two single channel boxes outside of power amps.
Pass Labs appears to still make the X0.2 preamp which has three chassis: one for control and one each for the left and right channels. They did come out with a couple of new preamps in 2008 the more expensive of which has a chassis for the control and audio stages and one for the power supply.
There always has to be one exception. Actually I would be surprised if there weren't others too.
There always has to be one exception. Actually I would be surprised if there weren't others too.
Hello,
there exist a few of them actually, here I have collected some examples:
http://www.whestaudio.co.uk/s-product.asp?ProductID=3
http://www.canaryaudio.com/903.htm
http://www.audiosalon.co.uk/gryphonsonata.html
there exist a few of them actually, here I have collected some examples:
http://www.whestaudio.co.uk/s-product.asp?ProductID=3
http://www.canaryaudio.com/903.htm
http://www.audiosalon.co.uk/gryphonsonata.html
Stellan Holgersson