Anybody know if there are any design differences between the two? Thought the 52K card (with no other source connected) would sound better than a hicapped prefixK because it is powered by a supercap. Any thoughts?
david
Posted on: 05 January 2004 by David Ng
James,
My experience with my PrefixK is that it sounds better with a dedicated Hicap than thru input of the 52. Not sure if this makes sense. That's why I stuck with my Hicap powering the PrefixK. But I have not really compared the 52K card and a Hicap PrefixK.
david
Posted on: 06 January 2004 by Laurie Saunders
As far as I know, the CIRCUIT for the K prefix is identical to the circuit for the 52/82 K phono boards. However, I believe that the circuit LAYOUT is "improved". There is no doubt in my mind that the K prefix, powered from the 52(ie supercap), is better than using the on-board K cards. In addition, when you are using a prefix, it is well worthwhile "pulling" the 52`s K boards...the sound quality of ALL inputs improves. (replace the K boards with "straight through" .....line - level boards).
Powering the prefix from its own dedicated *****cap improves the sound still further IMHO.
I cannot see(hear) why some would prefer the prefix powered via the 52.
Part of the reason for this , I believe, is that it "relieves" the supercap driving the 52 of some "load" and a possible source of "noise injection"(ie RFI)from the K boards
In addition, for the reasons above, driving the prefix with its own *****cap improves the sound quality of all the other inputs as well
Thus using a ****capped prefix, and "pulling" the onboard K boards is a win-win option
Laurie S
