• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

ART Precision Phono Pre Review

Rate this phono stage:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 6 4.9%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 33 27.0%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 67 54.9%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 16 13.1%

  • Total voters
    122

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,751
Likes
5,910
Location
PNW
Then again personally I don't care particularly, but might be interesting. I do have a pre-amp with some adjustability, never found that particularly useful with my MM cartridges at least. Never wanted to try mc, just couldn't see it being worth the expense.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
4,211
Care to consider the substance? I agree there is quite a bit of b.s. around turntable design (metal platters impart a more “solid” sound and such). But it’s not all b.s. The point that there are very different effective masses in the horizontal and vertical planes is not myth or misinformation; it’s a basic mechanical fact of how the linear arm/cartridge system works. Nor is it myth that the horizontal effective mass will inevitably be a lot higher than that of virtually any pivoting arm.

These mechanical facts are going to cause big problems in cartridge matching. For any arm, you’ve got to find a cartridge that is within its correct operating range on it. High mass arms work best with low compliance cartridges. Low mass arms work best with high compliance carts. So then, what sort of cartridge is going to be optimal for an arm that has both high and low effective mass at the same time?

IMHO you have got this all back to front.

The high horizontal H and low vertical V compliance of the LT arm is actually a huge advantage, and not at all the crippling problem that you describe.

The fact that a pivoting arm cannot separate H and V compliance is in fact the inherent weakness, not a strength.

Saying that the cartridge suspension compliance is the same H and V, and so the arm needs the same “to match the cartridge”, ignores what this is all about.

It’s all about achieving target resonance frequencies that won’t cause oscillations when the stylus encounters warps (vertical, up to 10 Hz, ideally undamped/steep slope) and eccentricities (horizontal, 1-2 Hz, ideally smoothly damped) in the record. These targets are very different in the V and H, hence the ideal effective mass is very different in the V and H, by a factor of 25 to 50.

Impossible with the pivoting arm, which is stuck with a factor of 1, so they just pick a rough compromise target resonance, somewhere in the middle*.

Fully achievable with a LT, because the H and V effective mass can be individually tuned. Even the different H and V dampening targets can be achieved.

Even if an effective mass H/V of 25 to 50 is impractical, a factor of 10 is still 10 times better than a pivoting arm. :)

cheers

* [Your claim that is *has to be* somewhere in the middle, and that the compromise point is perfect and should be constant, is innately wrong. The fact that Pierre Lurné makes a similar claim is not good for his reputation, and a great example of the sort of misinformation from boutique designers that I was talking about.]

[Edit: as noted below, it is not impossible to separate H and V compliance for a pivoting arm, just exceedingly rare and not ‘natural/inherent’ to the configuration. Good pickup.]
 
Last edited:

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
3,422
Likes
2,407
Location
Sweden
IMHO you have got this all back to front.

The high horizontal H and low vertical V compliance of the LT arm is actually a huge advantage, and not at all the crippling problem that you describe.

The fact that a pivoting arm cannot separate H and V compliance is in fact the inherent weakness, not a strength.

Saying that the cartridge suspension compliance is the same H and V, and so the arm needs the same “to match the cartridge”, ignores what this is all about.

It’s all about achieving target resonance frequencies that won’t cause oscillations when the stylus encounters warps (vertical, up to 10 Hz, ideally undamped/steep slope) and eccentricities (horizontal, 1-2 Hz, ideally smoothly damped) in the record. These targets are very different in the V and H, hence the ideal effective mass is very different in the V and H, by a factor of 25 to 50.

Impossible with the pivoting arm, which is stuck with a factor of 1, so they just pick a rough compromise target resonance, somewhere in the middle*.

Fully achievable with a LT, because the H and V effective mass can be individually tuned. Even the different H and V dampening targets can be achieved.

Even if an effective mass H/V of 25 to 50 is impractical, a factor of 10 is still 10 times better than a pivoting arm. :)

cheers

* [Your claim that is *has to be* somewhere in the middle, and that the compromise point is perfect and should be constant, is exactly wrong. The fact that PL makes a similar claim is not good for his reputation.]
Just a note,

a different effective mass in vertical and horizontal directions are certainly possible in a pivoting arm, e.g. the Moerch DP-8 tone arm.
 

anmpr1

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
3,722
Likes
6,406
If you want more variation in gain, capacitance and loading, Manley will happily sell you a Chinook...

I was surprised to see it at Sweetwater. My first thought was, "Is SW getting into hi-fi?" The closest they had come previously is a selection of DJ gear (such as this ART). Then I looked and saw it is categorized within 'Studio and Recording/Preamps and Channel Strips'. Hmmm... I wonder how many studios use this?

Fremer says it has a "sense of relaxation and abundant musical flow". God knows how relaxed he'd find it now, and how much the musical flow has increased, now that he's rewired his house with special circuit breakers.

On a side note: Sweetwater has mostly cornered the on-line guitar scene. I wonder if they are considering moving into hi-fi? I don't know the numbers, but my guess is that Crutchfield has that covered pretty well, at least at the low to mid end of the spectrum.

 

Angsty

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 11, 2020
Messages
1,862
Likes
2,215
Location
North Carolina, U.S.
I was surprised to see it at Sweetwater. My first thought was, "Is SW getting into hi-fi?" The closest they had come previously is a selection of DJ gear (such as this ART). Then I looked and saw it is categorized within 'Studio and Recording/Preamps and Channel Strips'. Hmmm... I wonder how many studios use this?

Fremer says it has a "sense of relaxation and abundant musical flow". God knows how relaxed he'd find it now, and how much the musical flow has increased, now that he's rewired his house with special circuit breakers.

On a side note: Sweetwater has mostly cornered the on-line guitar scene. I wonder if they are considering moving into hi-fi? I don't know the numbers, but my guess is that Crutchfield has that covered pretty well, at least at the low to mid end of the spectrum.

My understanding is that Manley has a large pro-audio following.
 

Grooved

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 26, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
441
So in few words, better buy the DJ PRE II from the same brand as it performs better and costs less

EDIT: not so sure as I just checked and saw that the DJ PRE II test was done at 5mV input like the other phono pre-amps in the graph, but it was also the only with A-weighted results
 
Last edited:

KRhodes

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2022
Messages
7
Likes
6
Grooved-I wish you weren't right. It does appear that the DJ PRE II is a better option. Now we know.
 

Angsty

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 11, 2020
Messages
1,862
Likes
2,215
Location
North Carolina, U.S.
My understanding is that Manley has a large pro-audio following.
Article from Sweetwater on Manley’s pro audio presence.

 
Last edited:

RigorDude

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
84
Likes
50
Location
CT
IMHO you have got this all back to front.

The high horizontal H and low vertical V compliance of the LT arm is actually a huge advantage, and not at all the crippling problem that you describe.

The fact that a pivoting arm cannot separate H and V compliance is in fact the inherent weakness, not a strength.
Just to be clear: I didn't say anything at all in my post about the "compliance" of a tonearm, let alone that a mismatch in them is a crippling problem. The the notion that compliance can be an attribute of tonearms is yours, not mine.

In my experience (and my post) compliance is a property of a cartridge: the greater or lesser degree of "give" of its suspension in response to tracking force and the mechanical action imparted by the record's movement.

Arms can have greater or lesser effective mass and bearing friction; they can have various types of damping; and arm tubes have various bending modes. Compliance? I've never seen those two terms brought together in that specific way, and I've been reading about audio longer than I care to admit. Nor can I think of how an arm could be compliant. If you have a link to a discussion of "arm compliance," I'd love to learn more about it.

Saying that the cartridge suspension compliance is the same H and V, and so the arm needs the same “to match the cartridge”, ignores what this is all about.

It’s all about achieving target resonance frequencies that won’t cause oscillations when the stylus encounters warps (vertical, up to 10 Hz, ideally undamped/steep slope) and eccentricities (horizontal, 1-2 Hz, ideally smoothly damped) in the record. These targets are very different in the V and H, hence the ideal effective mass is very different in the V and H, by a factor of 25 to 50.

I think there is more to it than avoiding resonances caused by warps or eccentricities, which fwiw I encounter as a problem only rarely. Mostly it's about how the cartridge and arm as a unit deal with the vibrational energy produced by the groove -- i.e. the music, not warps and wobbles.

Impossible with the pivoting arm, which is stuck with a factor of 1, so they just pick a rough compromise target resonance, somewhere in the middle*.

See above. I really don't see this as primarily about avoiding LF resonances, as they're just not a major factor in vinyl playback. The "Grado dance" is the one exception that comes to mind. Is that still a thing? Whether the resonance frequency is perfect for both warps and wobbles would be important if not for the fact that a decent approximation averts problems with 99.9% of records. That's precisely what the 9-12 Hz safe zone is about. But if you can point me to something that discusses LF resonances as a frequent and significant problem, I'm game to read it.

I see that Thomas_A mentioned the Moerch arm. But as I understand it, the Moerch uses higher horizontal mass to get better bass from stereo recordings -- not to avoid resonances. On the other hand, how such a complex system will deal with vibrational energy is anyone's guess.

Fully achievable with a LT, because the H and V effective mass can be individually tuned.

True, except that H effective mass always has to be really high.

Even the different H and V dampening targets can be achieved.

How can an air bearing be damped? With some sort paddle/trough?

* [Your claim that is *has to be* somewhere in the middle, and that the compromise point is perfect and should be constant, is innately wrong. The fact that Pierre Lurné makes a similar claim is not good for his reputation, and a great example of the sort of misinformation from boutique designers that I was talking about.]

The 9-12 Hz "safe zone" for cartridge LF resonance is hardly misinformation, let alone limited to boutique designers. It's what almost everyone uses in matching cartridges and arms. You can easily find calculators on the web to get your arm/cartridge resonance in the 9-12 Hz range. I don't see how it's a "compromise" or in some perilous space between Scylla and Charybdis. All it's for is to avoid warps and wobbles; it's not rocket science. Once more, in the interest of keeping an open mind, please direct me to something that says otherwise -- and explains how it's so.
 

RigorDude

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
84
Likes
50
Location
CT
It was in the review:

index.php
Thanks. Didn't notice it on the first pass. And I gather that it's a new thing for phono stage tests, so I wasn't expecting it.
 

sweetsounds

Active Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
140
Likes
278
@amirm: cool little device. It's amazing what you can do below $100.
Compared to the Cambridge the RIAA is also better

In your chart the low-cost ART DJ has a higher SINAD, but this was A-weighted and not comparable.

So actually isn't this unit the best performing sub-100$ preamp so far?
 

anmpr1

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
3,722
Likes
6,406
My understanding is that Manley has a large pro-audio following.
Yes indeed. Manley has both a pro and consumer line. Still, I wonder why Sweetwater would carry the consumer hi-fi line? I can't imagine many pro-oriented folks thinking, "You know, what I really need for my rack is a three thousand dollar phono stage, this five thousand dollar tube headphone amp, and the ever popular seven thousand dollar tube integrated, and then hook all that to my channel strip and compressor in order to hear the front to back depth I always knew I was missing!"

Whatever. My guess is that SW is not moving into hi-fi, but that in order to get the franchise, Manley told them they had to carry the hi-fi line. But who knows how it went down?
 

Angsty

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 11, 2020
Messages
1,862
Likes
2,215
Location
North Carolina, U.S.
Yes indeed. Manley has both a pro and consumer line. Still, I wonder why Sweetwater would carry the consumer hi-fi line? I can't imagine many pro-oriented folks thinking, "You know, what I really need for my rack is a three thousand dollar phono stage, this five thousand dollar tube headphone amp, and the ever popular seven thousand dollar tube integrated, and then hook all that to my channel strip and compressor in order to hear the front to back depth I always knew I was missing!"

Whatever. My guess is that SW is not moving into hi-fi, but that in order to get the franchise, Manley told them they had to carry the hi-fi line. But who knows how it went down?
Holding a few of these devices nationwide is probably not that big a deal inventory-wise given the 20+ year relationship they have with Manley. I’m willing to bet there are enough pro-audio audiophiles out there to make the inventory turnover reasonable. Some of the more expensive gear, like the Steelhead, are probably drop-shipped on order anyway.
 

anmpr1

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
3,722
Likes
6,406
Holding a few of these devices nationwide is probably not that big a deal inventory-wise given the 20+ year relationship they have with Manley. I’m willing to bet there are enough pro-audio audiophiles out there to make the inventory turnover reasonable. Some of the more expensive gear, like the Steelhead, are probably drop-shipped on order anyway.
One thing's for sure, margin on a three thousand dollar RIAA stage is going to be a lot higher than on this ART, which when you think about it is pretty give-away from a consumer's standpoint.

Plus, after they throw in the little bag of candy and the bumper sticker, what's not to like? Heck, on a good day you might talk your sales engineer (love that!) to throw in a set of Ernie Ball Slinkys, gratis..., but that might be asking a bit much on an eighty one dollar sale.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
4,211
Just to be clear: I didn't say anything at all in my post about the "compliance" of a tonearm, let alone that a mismatch in them is a crippling problem. The the notion that compliance can be an attribute of tonearms is yours, not mine.

In my experience (and my post) compliance is a property of a cartridge: the greater or lesser degree of "give" of its suspension in response to tracking force and the mechanical action imparted by the record's movement.

Arms can have greater or lesser effective mass and bearing friction; they can have various types of damping; and arm tubes have various bending modes. Compliance? I've never seen those two terms brought together in that specific way, and I've been reading about audio longer than I care to admit. Nor can I think of how an arm could be compliant. If you have a link to a discussion of "arm compliance," I'd love to learn more about it.

Compliance is a measure of the susceptibility of a structure to move as a result of an external force. Therefore the tonearm system as a whole, when playing a record with cartridge attached, has a compliance, and it needs to be different in H and V if we wish to optimise. (Effective mass and compliance go hand in hand. For example in a complex system where effective mass is near-impossible to measure, it can be derived from measured compliance, via some intermediate steps. If a system has an effective mass, then it has a compliance. Tonearm systems not exempted.)

I think there is more to it than avoiding resonances caused by warps or eccentricities, which fwiw I encounter as a problem only rarely. Mostly it's about how the cartridge and arm as a unit deal with the vibrational energy produced by the groove -- i.e. the music, not warps and wobbles.
No, it’s all about warps and eccentricities. How to not resonate to them without affecting the music frequencies.

I see that Thomas_A mentioned the Moerch arm. But as I understand it, the Moerch uses higher horizontal mass to get better bass from stereo recordings -- not to avoid resonances. On the other hand, how such a complex system will deal with vibrational energy is anyone's guess.
They go hand in hand. The further we separate H resonance from the lowest bass frequencies in music, the less the tonearm system will respond to bass in the music (which would weaken signal amplitude). Which is exactly what a (good) LT arm designer is aiming at, too. That’s why it is more optimal this way.

How can an air bearing be damped? With some sort paddle/trough?
I never said air bearings. But in answer, sure, a paddle or trough like any other type of arm, or simply via the choice of air film thickness. Another way is simply to move the resonant frequency further away from the forcing frequency. Fortunately, if you raise H effective mass and get the resonance far enough away from the music frequencies, damping becomes idealistic rather than necessary. But leave it at 9-12 Hz horizontal and damping becomes more necessary.

The 9-12 Hz "safe zone" for cartridge LF resonance is hardly misinformation, let alone limited to boutique designers. It's what almost everyone uses in matching cartridges and arms. You can easily find calculators on the web to get your arm/cartridge resonance in the 9-12 Hz range.
The misinformation is the claim that 9-12 Hz is desirable for both H and V. As explained in my previous post.

All it's for is to avoid warps and wobbles; it's not rocket science.
Didn’t you just finish (Moerch, above) disputing my statements that it is for the purpose of avoiding what you call ‘warps and wobbles’? But now that you agree, I can agree with you: it’s not rocket science.

I’m ending this here because we are way too far off topic for a phono preamp review. You started it by quoting a much-mistaken analysis of LT arms as having a huge issue in the H resonance being much lower than the V resonance, when it’s actually a strength and more optimal to the system requirements. That’s been corrected now, so I’m happy.

Cheers
 
Last edited:

Angsty

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 11, 2020
Messages
1,862
Likes
2,215
Location
North Carolina, U.S.
Very interesting. Amir was at a trial-and-error phase early on in testing phono stages, so there are more variances in the early protocols. I'd argue that a SINAD chart is probably not as comparable a ranking system for phonos as it is for DACs, given the S/N limitations of the medium itself and the FR variances of phonos relative to DACs.
 

audiopile

Active Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
161
Likes
125
Ya- maybe time to put a footnote on the first tries at measuring phono preamps . Really appreciate the ART DJ Pre II -but it seems a little odd that's it over there on the far left of that chart. This does point out the Mark Twain ? quote :"there's lies ,damm lies and statistics." is still valid. For me distortion and noise are aspects of a phono preamp are important -but because I switch cartridges a LOT -overload is a spec I pay attention to and often find either completely missing or creatively described . The ability to simply monitor this via the color of LED's on the front panel of the these very affordable ART phono preamps is useful and effective.
 

Robin L

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
5,209
Likes
7,588
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
This is a review and detailed measurements of the ART Precision Phono Pre. It was kindly drop shipped to me by a member and costs US $81.
View attachment 212653
The look reminds of Radio Shack equipment of 1970s! So outdated but I guess it keeps their costs down. You get variable gain which is handy together with a low cut rumble filter. Support is provided for both Moving Magnet and Moving Coil cartridges. Power is provided through a 9 volt AC transformer:
View attachment 212655

A bit of loading choice is provided in the back as well (25 vs 100 ohm).

ART Precision Phono Pre Measurements
As usual we start with our dashboard in MM mode:
View attachment 212656
This ranks the unit above average with respect to noise & distortion:

View attachment 212657

It could do better if power supply noise was kept in check more. Here is the Moving Coil performance:
View attachment 212658

Power supply noise dominates even more here.

Most important test here is RIAA equalization implementation:
View attachment 212659

There is a shelving down below 3 kHz or so but rather small. There is channel imbalance though courtesy of that gain potentiometer. Low-cut filter is doing its job but causes a bit of boost before rolling off steeply.

Next important bit is headroom so that pops and clicks don't get amplified due to amplifier clipping:
View attachment 212661

This is better than many phono stages. Finally, here is a rather new/optimized measurement of distortion alone:
View attachment 212664

Normally THD+N is dominated by noise due to high gain of these preamps. Above graph isolates just the distortion so we can keep a handle on it. It has a slope down because due to RIAA equalization, gain is increased in lower frequencies and hence rise in distortion.

Conclusions
The ART Precision Phono Pre gets the basics right at a very attractive price. Flexibility of variable gain is there but you lose some channel matching (mine was set to "0" for above tests). Not much to ask for other than a nicer looking enclosure in a future revision.

---------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
Just set up a very old and very budget turntable using a vintage Rat Shack phono preamp. Worked well enough for the intended purpose.
 

audiopile

Active Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
161
Likes
125
That's why I am so impressed by the current ART preamps. Started in the stereo biz in 67 (mighta been 66?) - we sold the Astatic version of the Rat shack clamshell phono preamp. I sold a fair number of them and they sounded terrible. From the get go I had religion about selling really cheap turntables and always attempted to talk customers out of them since they not only sounded bad but permanently damaged records. Here;s the thing the clamshell phono preamps sold for anywhere from 10 bucks to 20 over my career -90-180 bucks in 2022 dollars. So effectively ART is asking the customer for about the same kind of money and delivering remarkable performance for the buck. That counts for me. State of the art -not within my budget or interest-but exceptional performance for the dollar always interests me.
 
Top Bottom