Still no subsonic filter?
This product must be intended for customers who only play perfectly flat records, don't have truly full range speakers and/or have plenty of amplifier power to waste.
The recording is bathed in room reverb with perhaps some echo chamber enhancement. The record expresses a huge three-dimensional space in which are placed equally three-dimensional images arrayed front to back and side to side. Instrumental transparency is astonishing as is the transient clarity.
It’s got Billie Holiday, “Red” Allen, Coleman Hawkins, The Count Basie All Stars (including Lester Young, Doc Cheatham, Jo Jones, etc.), Jimmy Giuffre and many others rehearsing for a one hour television special presented live the next day, Sunday, December 8th 1957. I can imagine how some younger folks reading this are thinking “1957? That’s gotta sound like warmed over, old fashioned crap!” These traditional jazz/big band performances are explosive compared to the cool of Kind of Blue, recorded in the same space very closely spaced in time. No one needs to make apologies for that recording either!
Because of contract issues some who were on TV like Thelonious Monk and Gerry Mulligan are not on the record but its an all-star cast on vinyl nonetheless.
The JC3+ handled this record well. It couldn’t produce the enormity of the space or fully express the low end transient impact but just above what was missing was a fully formed, credible rendering of the recording with just a well-balanced overall “nip and tuck”: a global act of omission.
The JC3+’s top end was well extended enough to suggest the room ambience plus the reverb’s airiness, but not all of it. Pull back a bit everywhere and you still have excellent overall balance that produces a refreshing lack of character.
The further into the background a phono preamplifier or any piece of electronics can fade, the more fully a recording can express its character and the less likely you are to hear an identifiable sameness creeping into every record you play.
The JC3+’s midrange neutrality and transient cleanliness and its lack of grit, hyper edge definition or on the other side of that divide, softness, challenge the performance of far more expensive preamplifiers.
About the original JC3 I wrote “…(a) remarkably fine phono preamp that easily held its own against far more expensive competition. Its minor shortcomings were at the extremes of frequency response, dynamics and timbral verisimilitude. The “center” held completely.
“In other words, unless you’re running full range, ultra-dynamic speakers you won’t miss what that JC3 hasn’t got to give and even then I can confidently say that the JC3 now represents the best value in a phono preamp that I know of—as long as you can abide by the 100ohm/47kOhm loading limitation.”
Now you no longer have to abide by that limitation. On the other hand since then in an increasingly hot vinyl market other manufacturers are stepping up to the plate with similarly priced competition, for instance the well-engineered and fine sounding $2500 LKV Research Phono 2 SB, which I did not have on hand to make a direct comparison.
The "all business" (read: "homely") LKV (made in U.S.A.) doesn’t offer the Parasound’s chassis solidity or satiny face plate but it does have a substantial outboard power supply as well as both balanced XLR inputs and outputs and single-ended ones as well. It too is impressively quiet. However its overall presentation was somewhat more clinical, a bit leaner in the midbass and its harmonic development somewhat less generous overall. Its “leanness” and “cleanliness” reminded me somewhat of the old (and I mean old) PS Audio sound of the late 1980s, which I for one absolutely loved especially into two-way, limited range, spatially coherent speakers like the Spica TC-50s I owned. The combination produced a lot to look at as well as hear. Lots of fine detail too.
The JC3+’s overall sound is somewhat more fully fleshed out and “meaty” in the midrange, the images it produces larger and more filled in. I’m somewhat exaggerating the differences here to make the point.
My original JC3 review compared it to far more expensive phono preamps including the Pass XP25, the Ypsilon VPS100 and one from Allnic. I did so because I felt it was good enough to play on the same field. I concluded “The JC3 tucks it in ever so slightly on both ends, losing some shimmer on top and punch on bottom.” That’s how the JC3+ performed as well compared to other way more expensive phono preamps.
Considering the price differentials, I again came away impressed by the JC3+. It does everything well and its minor acts of omission will not be noticed or missed on the kinds of systems in which it’s likely to be used. In real world priced systems it’s likely to max-out vinyl performance and keep you locked in to listening for years to come.
If you go from one of the modest priced phono preamps analogplanet.com surveyed last year to the JC3+, you’ll have no trouble hearing the sonic improvement. And as you upgrade cartridge and turntable the JC3+ will comfortably go along for the ride…..at least until you hit the lottery!
Still no subsonic filter?
This product must be intended for customers who only play perfectly flat records, don't have truly full range speakers and/or have plenty of amplifier power to waste.
What price would you consider to be a real world system?
...evidently because their designers don't live in the real world or they never bother to learn.
50 years ago, Bud Fried recognized the need for bandwidth limiting in amplifiers used with wideband speakers - including a subsonic filter in the phono preamp.
Quoting Tomlinson Holman (from 40 years ago): "An often overlooked and important area of preamplifier design is the amplifier’s infrasonic response..." The full text is available here: http://www.davidreaton.com/pdfs/holman_aes_paper.pdf
Do you have any test records with spot frequency (not swept) test tones, such as those CBS used to produce?
Play one using a preamp with a switchable subsonic filter (with at least a third order - 18dB/octave response). Measure the IM distortion at the output of your speakers (or just listen for any difference) with the filter in and out of circuit. Also, compare the peak power output of your amplifier with and without the filter.
Speaking of gurus, if Holman's work doesn't impress you, how about Rich Maez? His phono preamp design incorporates a 3-pole subsonic filter and you seem to have liked the unit's performance when you reviewed it.
Well I decided to wait for the JC3+ once I heard the details of the enhancements so did not purchase the JC3 after your first review. Hard to tell from this article whether you heard any real gains (too bad the original JC3 had left the building). After a nearly 8 month wait mine arrived in January. During those 8 months I had bided my time with one of Parasound's zPhono preamps. Needless to say the difference was startling. I have yet to play with the settings. I think we are set on 50 ohms right now and everyone seems to have a different rule of thumb when it comes to adjusting it. My retailer says the vinyl sounds so good right now he hates to even mess with it. One thing I am not used to is having a power switch on the phono preamp...keep forgetting and leaving the thing on overnight. Those Living Stereo titles keep rolling in and I simply ENJOY.
Nice unit but unfortunately, not sold in Canada since it does not meet CSA standards (shame...).
Would still love to see you follow through on the Jasmine Phono Stage review you hinted at a bit back. They have had 2 upgrades since the original review. The new one can handle 2 turntables. I know, a whole different realm but I believe or my ears lead me to believe the Jasmine is one of if not the best value out there. Less than $600. A great deal for those of us who suffer from budgetary contraints. I looked at a Parasound in my price range with the onboard headphone amp and all and took your recommendation that it may have not been the best choice. A borrowed Parasound (prior to receiving my Jasmine) from many years back (PPH-100) could not even compare to my Jasmine. I am guessing the Parasound PPH-100 was a great buy in it's day. I am certainly not comparing the Parasound you reviewed except by name alone and the choices I had within my price range.
Please excuse my naive question but is 100 ohms loading really considered as good as one needs for most MC cartridges? I do experience relatively subtle effects from loading but that catridge I currently use, a Clearaudio Concerto II, does seem to respond to a little lower (higher value) setting. I confess, I actually like it wide open at 47k too but 100 ohms just sounds a little dull. By the way, thanks for all you do for those of us who love LPs!
The webpage for the Clearaudio Concerto II cartridge lists a recommended load resistance of 300 ohms.
Likewise for the technical data chart in the owner's manual.
However, the owner's manual goes on to say:
"Loading between 100 Ohms and 1 Kohms may be used with some solid state for best results.
We strongly recommend starting at 47 Kohm loading down until breaking in has been completed.
We achieved the best results with a loading of 200 ohms."
Thanks Ortofan -- I do have the manual but I was really asking a more general question about the utility of a 100ohm setting for most MCs. IF I had to use the 100ohm with the Concerto it would make music, but not as well as it does at other loadings. But maybe the Clearaudios are the outliers to the general rule?
I've been using Ortofons for decades and the load for most of their MC cartridges is specified simply as >10 ohms. Exceptions include some of the Kontrapunkt and Cadenza models, where the load is spec'd at 50-500 ohms. Audio-Technica generally specifies a 100 ohm load. However, I use a Tamura transformer as the step-up device, so the load for the cartridge ends up being whatever impedance gets reflected back to the input from the phono amplifier.
I was torn between the kW phono stage from Musical Fidelity and the JC-3, and went with the kW when I got a great deal on one. IIRC you had one of the kW phonos at some point. Can't find your review anywhere though. Can you speak to how they compare sonically?
Some comments from MF about the kW as part of the Aesthetix Rhea review here:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/aesthetix-rhea-phono-preamplifier-michael-fremer-june-2005
I’ve owned a lot of Musical Fidelity gear from the last decade: A3cr separates, A3.2cr separates, and A308cr separates. The limited edition Anniversary Tri-Vista kW power amp actually used some “trickle-up” technology originally developed for the A308 series. These components represent the Musical Fidelity house sound that won rave reviews on both sides of the pond, and what I like to think of as the “classic” Musical Fidelity sound.
I found a “new old stock” kW Phono from a dealer that I recently added to the A308 stack. I believe that, starting with the kW regular production line (*not* the Anniversary Tri-Vista gear), MuFi’s house sound went in different direction, from light, bright, open, transparent, fast, and airy; to a little darker and smoother with bigger (but not overdamped) bass and more physicality/palpability. The kW phono has depth charge bass, but lacks some of the high frequency filigree of MuFi’s earlier circuit designs. Both flavors of the MuFi sound, however, are superbly detailed and dynamic, and neither are harmonically lean (for solid state).
With the caveat that I have not heard the Tri-Vista kW Anniversary gear, or other examples of the kW regular production line, I believe Mr. Fremer’s description of the Tri-Vista kW conveys the gestalt of the A308 sound, while his description of the kW Hybrid preamp and kW750 power amp conveys the gestalt of the kW phono sound. I mention this because those reviews of Mr. Fremer’s are available on Stereophile’s website, while, as yet, the kW phono review has not been published online. Personally, I think the A308 gear is closer to a strict, uncolored neutrality, that is highly responsive to changes in cables to allow tailoring of the sound to suit listener preference. The kW sound starts out a little more tailored. The kW is not as dark as BAT solid state or some of the older Krell, but it’s not as explicitly open as Musical Fidelity’s earlier gear.
Make no mistake, the kW phono is a big step up from the good-quality internal phonostage of the A308 preamp (which handily showcases the superiority of even a modest vinyl rig over CD), but the sound is also a study in contrasts. If you’ve tuned a system around the A3, A3.2 or A308 gear, adding the kW may require tuning in somewhat the opposite direction. Those who are fans of the classic Musical Fidelity sound might consider loading the cartridge less on the kW to recover some of the brightness.
Many thanks for that impression. The dynamics and bass are two of my favorite aspects to the kW. Look forward to that review being posted at some point in the future. A great phono stage, but would love to see how it compared to others that you had around when you reviewed it.
Am I correct thinking that you will be at AXPONA this weekend? If so, I hope to meet you there!
" ...
Nice unit but unfortunately, not sold in Canada since it does not meet CSA standards (shame...).
..."
Michael Fremer added: " ... You Can't Just Sneak One In? ..."
You could, but it requires jumping through a few hoops. Parasound dealers are prohibited from shipping to Canada. You would either have to physically drive across the border, have a sympathetic friend who lives in the US (for a shipping address), or use a Customs Broker with a US warehouse. Mine does, but most do not.
I do find it strange that Parasound chooses not to have the unit tested to CSA standards, since Underwriter's Laboratory will test to CSA and US standards at the same time (as will CSA). Must be a decision to limit costs vs a small market.
Why not I said! Compared to the phono boards in my McIntosh MX112 or Rega BrioR the Parasound Halo unit is an unquestionable advancement in phono reproduction. The life and uncanny images the JC3 + unleash from my recordings, one album after another etc, is startling after decades of using freebie built in phono sections. Funny thing is I still liked vinyl better than any other medium available, yet I now feel like I was only hearing half of the music.
So Michael, as you stated that sometimes you wish you could go from a run of the mill phono stage to something like the JC3 to appreciate the improvements fully, well I’m that guy. Wow!!