SuperLine Loading Thread.

Just for fun…….

If you plug in two resistive load plugs simultaneously to two values combine to give a new value.

Load plug combinations:
1k and 500R = 333R
1k and 220R = 180R
1k and 100R = 91R
500R and 220R = 153R
500R and 100R = 83R
220R and 100R = 68R

Note:
1. 1k and 500R is the same as 500R and 1k etc
2. Obviously there will be no space left for capacitor load plugs.
3. Here's the maths, 500R and 220R = 1/(1/500)+(1/220) = 153R
.

Summary - so far

Nice chart - Very useful.

Additional information for Dynavector 17D3 users following an install on Wednesday: I found a 500R + 1nF worked better than a bare 470R no cap as it was just as musical but a little sweeter and a little fuller in the lower registers which suited the customer's system. - LP12/Aro/Dynavector 17D3/Geddon/552/300/SL2s.

Kind regards,

Peter

I imagine that there will be some differences in SuperLine loading requirements between the same cartridge - but in different arms (cabling).

Adam/Steve Sells

Thanks for the table; very useful

packerman - might I suggest you get hold of a 560R plug. When I had a Benz LP, the difference between the S and K Prefix was significant, the K being much better. 560+1 will give you the nearest equivalent to the old K spec.

Julian

quote:

If you plug in two resistive load plugs simultaneously to two values combine to give a new value.

I also tried this after talking to Naim USA and it does work well, in my case 220//500 = 153 ohms which is what I was looking for. Will try the other combinations at the weekend.

Jeremy

How do you plug 2 resistives in together?

quote:

Originally posted by 110dB:
If you plug in two resistive load plugs simultaneously to two values combine to give a new value.

If the capacitance is in the ballpark - you could use combinations of 2 resistive loads to refine your setting. When you have determined your preference - a single plug (of the combined value) could be made up by your retailer.

Of course - the provided values are likely to be perfectly suitable for most users.

Damn - just edited your post (out of existence) rather than quoted it.

It probably (?) would have gone with a future "trim". Says he.

quote:

Originally posted by BigH47:
How do you plug 2 resistives in together?

Howard, you can use a resistive plug in the capacitive socket - the only problem then is you have no space for the cap load plug if required. However, once you have a resistive value that gives you optimum sound using 110dB's table above, you could then get the two loads combined in one plug via one's Naim dealer. You could then have the capacitive socket free again.

The good thing is.... That with a thread like this building a pool of infomation for everyone to use. I can tell you that if you have a Dynavector or a Linn cartridge, it's isn't going to work as well as the higher values around 500R +/- a bit, as I reported the findings on the 330R and 390R earlier in the thread. Thus saving you some time and effort.

The table as shown above will eventually have lots of "best" suggested loads for a wide variety of cartridges, saving everyone some time and effort in getting the very best sound from their Superline. Those that still want to experiment for themselves of course, still will be able to do so.

Kind regards,

Peter

quote:

Originally posted by kuma:
[i][color:BLUE]Damn - just edited your post (out of existence) rather than quoted it.

LOL Adam.
At least you've fessed up publicly.

quote:

Originally posted by Cymbiosis:
Howard, you can use a resistive plug in the capacitive socket - the only problem then is you have no space for the cap load plug if required. However, once you have a resistive value that gives you optimum sound using 110dB's table above, you could then get the two loads combined in one plug via one's Naim dealer.

Wish I'd got Kuma to say that for me.

I can't even spell correctly!
I just re-read what I wrote and I admit spelling and grammar errors are appalling. How embarrassing.

Anyways, continuing on this evening, I have went through fitting two resistors together suggested by 110dB above.

There were no clear winner but as the lower the value, I've heard a weighter and somewhat bloated overall presentation. Everything seemed loaded downwards and sounded too heavy for my taste.

1k/500R=333R setting was good in the midrange and grooved along nicely but it was a tad bright on the top end. Maybe this is where I could use one made and try a separate cap as most instances adding on a capacitive value smooths out the trebles. ( 1nF would be sufficient, I'd reckon )

So, I went back to the 220R/No Cap again. ( after all that! ). Then what a heck, I decided to try No plugs on it.

Instantly I've gained more midrange presence which is missing from the current setting. The bass is weighter but still firm. Overall it has more natural feel to it. It has a different feel than a 220R /No cap setting, but I think I'm gonna keep it a while longer.
And I will go back to the 220R/No cap again to see.

Overall, I am amased how well it's doing even off a 52! ( it's actually competing well with a Phonocube at almost twice the price )

Just a quick comment on the use of two resistive loading plugs on the rear of the SuperLine–the DIN-5 180° socket for capacitance loading is directly wired in parallel with the 50? BNC and WBT nexgen RCA phono sockets; the DIN socket for resistive loading is wired in parallel with the capacitive loading socket.

I'm just taking a guess here, but this is probably an intentional arrangement, which permits the capacitive loading to perform optimally (Steve Sells, please chime in!) as per the owners' manual. However, it may be advantageous to, when not using a capacitive loading plug, to try a single resistive plug in the capacitive socket–or, when using two resistive loading plugs, to assess whether there is a difference between loading the higher value into the right (capacitive) position (or vice versa).

Should these things matter? On the surface, no–but there are always plenty of surprises in this strange hobby.

I'll likely take this out on a Te Kaitora Rua sometime later in the (next) week.

Hi Steve

The eqiuvalent to K configuration is achieved by using the 560ohm and 1nF plugs. The 560ohm plug is a special request item so make sure your dealer has organised that for you.

Start there then try the other plugs that come in the box and please report your findings back here for other Transfiguration owners.

Good luck, Julian

Almost a week with mine. I did not try all combinations but for the time being the vdH Condor is best with 220R/1nF. Very good. Great control, more weight. Taking 0,1g from the tracking weight gives me the usual timing. Unbelievable what active DBLs can deliver. I hope the neighbours like my choice of music...

quote:

Originally posted by ken c:
to what extent do the optimum RC loading for given cartridge depend on pickup arm being used?

Unless all arm leads and cables have the same characteristics (which they don't) this aspect must be part of what the cartridge "sees". I would expect differences between an ARO lead and that on an Ekos - but I might be wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Crouch:
In the meantime I have been following the thread but all this talk of capacitance and resistance means nothing to me! Can someone kindly provide a dummies guide to a non techy? Also, just wondering, as a reference point: I am moving from a Prefix K and have a Transfiguration Temper V. What is the Prefix K most comparable in comparison to the Superline loadings. At least I can then start at roughly the same point beforer changing loadings. Confused!

Steve, As you might imagine, I have been talking to quite a number of people regarding ensuring people get the very best from their Superline. In particular John Burns the importer of Dynavector in the UK, and he in turn has been talking to Masaaki Sasa at Dynavector in Japan, he is their designer and is very interested to hear how we get on with our loading tests. Additionally, John has been talking to Dynavectors phono stage designer too and I've cut and pasted part of John's email as I feel it's intresting and relevant to cartrige loading and Naim in particular. It also shows how important experimentation/listening tests are. - Also a little bit of history

"Dear Peter

Our expert on that is Jonathan Davies of DV Australia who designed the P75 and P300 onboard stage. All things being equal he feels 100 ohms is right but different results are preferrable in each cartridge/phono stage combination. When I started with DV back in the early nineties Paul Stephenson and I sat down and listened to a variety of settings on the onboard cards Naim used at the time. 100 ohms definitely did not work. We ended up preferring 470 ohms. I like to think that each 'system' will have its own equlibrium, I would expect the Superline to work best at 470 (S boards) with most cartridges as you found. The 560 (K board) setting works with the Linn cartridges because they heavily damp the cartridge which has the effect of reducing bass. I remember Julian trying to explain to me when he introduced K boards that it wasn't better or worse than the S, it just suited the Karma's characteristics better.

Just as well we've got ears."

So lot's of people are interested and all findings are useful - let the listening tests continue and please let us know your findings.

Kind regards,

Peter

quote:

Originally posted by Emil F.:
Almost a week with mine. I did not try all combinations but for the time being the vdH Condor is best with 220R/1nF. Very good. Great control, more weight. Taking 0,1g from the tracking weight gives me the usual timing. Unbelievable what active DBLs can deliver. I hope the neighbours like my choice of music...

...Update. I start to feel 220R only is more natural sounding.

...digging 470R || 1nF on Te Kaitora Rua.

I've just spent a very nice evening at Roger Poll's place and we ended up with the 560R and 1nF on his full Se spec LP12 with Akiva. We tried various combinations using the 500R and 5.6nF options but consistantly found the 560R and 1nF combination the best by a clear margin.

Regards,

Peter

UPDATE:
Well, I still think that a 220R/No cap is the way to go but in my system it proved a bit fatiguing.
In 500 series based system, there was no sign of distress with the Miyabi/47 albeit the Superline was Supercapped.

So, I've been using the no cap/no resistor arrangement but this one lags a bit on the bass.
Not as open as a 220R/No cap, but okey, it's a trade off for having a bit more intimate midrange and treble civility.

I went back and the one I have missed was the 220R/1k setting.
It's a sort of like the middle point between the 220R/No cap and a *bare* setting.
I did tried the setting earlier but I thought the single 220R was more open and faster.
What's worse on a 220R/1k setting is that it sounds completely closed down via my headfone.
The difference between the resistor settings shows up even more when I listen via a set of cans.

If I were using a 552/300, no doubt that I would stick with a 220R/No cap setting, but in the current system context, I am going back and forth between the 220/1k and bare thus far.

What I am struggling still a bit is a lack of naturalness and ease.
This is where a Supercap comes in handy with a Superline I think.

OK, I hope you are sitting down. Dr Peter has just left, and boy was this a fascinating evening.

Just to refresh on context of system:

lp12/aro/xv1s/armaged/superline/hicap/52/supercap/
snaxo362/supercap/6x135s/dbls. Fraim throughout, custom high current mains wiring on its own mains phase spur to a custom hydra.

We started with the custom from-Naim hand-labelled 470ohm resister pack, no cap. (Throughout this, there is no capacitance plug -- makes the xv1s sound lumpen and slow). Much much better than the 520 or whatever comes in the standard pack, but we knew that from the evening when we installed Superline.

Excellent sound, interesting and vibrant.

Then we went to 453 from-naim hand-labelled plug. Our jaws dropped and bounced multiple times.

Oh

My

Gawd.

Tuneplaying lifted to totally another level. Reduction in mid/hf hash. Much clearer all over. Deeper bass with way more punch. Much more articulate. Huge imagery, with depth (remember, this is DBLs...) Layers and layers of depth. Layers of instruments. Real musicians doing real things with real instruments.

Then we went to a custom hand-labelled from-naim 430ohms. Boring. Hifi sound. Bland.

We then spent the next two hours going back and forth between 430, 453 and 470. The results are clear, unanimous and unequivocal.

453 is a super super super sweet spot for the xv1s. Almost like a tuned resonance of sweetspot.

Both Dr Peter and I are in 100% agreement, and you wont like this -- 470 to 453 is a bigger improvement, by *miles*, than superline/hicap to superline/supercap. By miles. And then some. And some more on top.

We suspect the factory know this -- they have their own XV1S, and we think Dr Superline has been doing some playing... he suggested the 453 to try. We think he knows something about the way xv1s works with superline with 453 ohms.

If you have XV1S, Aro, aro arm lead to bnc and superline, then you absolutely *must* try 453 ohms. You have not even begun to hear what your TT and Superline can do until you have done so.

Remember, its bigger than hicap->supercap. No bull, honest.

Dr Peter will post shortly when he gets home. He took away the 453ohm but promised me one from Dr Superline within a few days. Cant wait...

(Thanks to Dr P and Dr S for their help in this!)

jon

Getting down and dirty with the little blighters!

A most interesting evening!

Jon has covered pretty much all our findings above so I'll just add a few of my own observations:

Up until now, I have been very happy with the 470 ohm loading for the Dynavector XV1-s and pretty much all other Dynavectors, although I did find with a 17D3 in an Aro/LP12/Geddon/552/300/SL2 system last week I prefered a 500R with just 1nF - the Superline was powered by a hi-Cap.

As you may have seen from earler postings I have been awaiting some loadings intermediate to the ones I have tested so far. Fortunately a few days ago Steve Sells kindly posted a 430R special I had requested for test. And, in the bag was a 453R and a couple of other cap values with a note saying I made a couple of additional values for fun for you to try! (or words to that effect). Now whether Steve knows something about a 453R and an XV-s I know not, and it may just be coincidence that the factory now owns one but......?

Well, either way in the context of Jon's system it was a master-stroke. For those who have heard Jon's system before all I'll say is that this small change in impedance made a massive improvement over the 470R. - Guys, I've never heard Jon's system sound "this" good before! Granted, it always sounds wonderful but this small change elivated one's enjoyment into a different league! Truly breathtaking - brilliant!

So, to my comments on the loading values:

430R A little coloured in the bass as compared to my previous best value the 470R. A little stodgy, flatter, lacking in emotion a little. Dare I say a little Hi-Fi! Still very good though.

453R Wow, what's going on here! Absolutely fantastic - Live, you were as near as damn it there! I'm not normally one that goes for all the superlatives, but wow it nearly took my breath away!

So, as compared to the 470R then: Even more tuneful, better dynamics, so clean, so detailed every thing was just so incredibly together, the bass just started and stoped like never before, so musical, it was just so real! I could have sat and listened to it for hours and hours with the 453R.

470R Well, after the 453R I have to say it was a little bit of an anti-climax. Still very good, but everything seemed a little less tuneful, slightly harder and there was a hint of high frequency hash/smearing of the sound. Still good, punchy, musical but just nowhere near as good! - I would not have believed such a relatively small difference in loading could have done this, unless I'd heard it for myself.

So. Well done Steve. Did you know 'd like this? Or did you not? Hey, I don't care

Further to Jon's point on the difference between 470R and 453R and the differences between Hi-Cap and Supercap powering the Superline in his system: The comparisons were made between power supplies were made only a couple of hours after initial installation. The loading comparisons were made after a month or two of burn in. So although I didn't take a Supercap with me on this occasion (as I'd only called in to swap a Fraim level over, as I was in the area working on another system) I feel that a re-evaluation of the Suercap in the context of Jon's system would be so much more friutful now, after this burn-in time.

The thought of powering the Superline via Supercap and SNAXO Burndey, now with a 453R in place is one to savour for the future, but oh my gawd does come to mind for me on this one!.....Can it really get any better than this? - I don't know, but I'll continue to keep trying.

Kind regards,

Peter

Do also try 438R (two 220R 5% resistors twisted together)–and you may be able to achieve a variety of values given the tolerance band.

All this on a '97-spec LP12 + Aro + NAPSA2, using SUPERCAP2 + Burndy for the PS, and in conjunction with a 1nF cap plug.