• 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!

Cambridge Audio Solo Phono Preamplifier Review

Angsty

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 11, 2020
Messages
1,862
Likes
2,215
Location
North Carolina, U.S.
Emotiva XPS-1 is $121 now - even better bargain.


Edit: adding Emotiva link - https://emotiva.com/products/xps-1?...MI2p6dt8qw-AIVK_bjBx1a8g1bEAQYASABEgJGPvD_BwE
 
Last edited:

milosz

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
583
Likes
1,643
Location
Chicago
Thinking of "stretching my dollars" on the Duo (but spending them!) to replace the bad-testing Hagerman box reviewed here or possibly this Solo unit, but need to ask the obvious: am I just spending money cos I have upgradeitis, or is there likely to be an audible difference between either Cambridge unit and the Hagerman (which was audibly MUCH better than the internal phono stage on my 40 yr old Quad preamp tho)?

Also, I was going to ask my question in the Cambridge Duo review thread, but neither it nor the Hager man review will load for me for 2 days now...hmmm
I don't think you would hear the difference in S/N ratio, as the LP itself will be noisier than any phono preamp. But you MIGHT hear a difference in RIAA response. Being able to hear a difference means that the more accurate one -the Duo- will sound different to you from the Solo. If all production versions of the Duo are actually as accurate in their RIAA curves as the one that was tested, then the Duo would be MORE ACCURATE but that doesn't mean you'd necessarily prefer it more in an blind A/B test. You might LIKE the slight FR change that the Solo makes. The Duo is BETTER in the sense that it more closely follows the RIAA playback equalization, but it's possible that the sound of the solo might be something you like a little more. There's no way to tell except to listen yourself, unfortunately.

But if you have some reason to prefer higher accuracy- for example if you are auditioning pressings from a vinyl production line - then you might prefer the Duo purely for engineering reasons. Or, if you are like me, you'll want to own the more accurate unit because to you knowing that it is more accurate makes it more enjoyable to own. Even when I am not listening to my Topping DAC I am happy to think about how transparent / accurate it is. Ownership of gear isn't ONLY about the sound- although there is a belief that the most accurate. transparent devices will yield sound that is as close as possible to the sound that the artist intended. Some part of ownership is knowing about the gear and appreciating the technical performance that you know it is capable of.

For example, I love the fact that my $200 Topping DAC outperforms many $4,000 DACs. Yes, I like to listen to music, but I also like to own objects about which there is a story that pleases me.
 
Last edited:

Angsty

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 11, 2020
Messages
1,862
Likes
2,215
Location
North Carolina, U.S.
I don't think you would hear the difference in S/N ratio, as the LP itself will be noisier than any phone preamp. But you MIGHT hear a difference in RIAA response. Being able to hear a difference means that the more accurate one -the Duo- will sound different to you from the Solo. If all production versions of the Duo are actually as accurate in their RIAA curves as the one that was tested, then the Duo would be MORE ACCURATE but that doesn't mean prefer it more in an blind A/B test. You might LIKE the slight FR change that the Solo makes. The Duo is BETTER in the sense that it more closely follows the RIAA playback equalization, but it's possible that the sound of the solo might be something you like a little more. There's no way to tell except to listen yourself, unfortunately.

But if you have some reason to prefer higher accuracy- for example if you are auditioning pressings from a vinyl production line - then you might prefer the Duo purely for engineering reasons. Or, if you are like me, you'll want to own the more accurate unit because to you knowing that it is more accurate makes it more enjoyable to own. Even when I am not listening to my Topping DAC I am happy to think about how transparent / accurate it is. Ownership of gear isn't ONLY about the sound- although there is a belief that the most accurate. transparent devices will yield sound that is as close as possible to the sound that the artist intended. Some part of ownership is knowing about the gear and appreciating the technical performance that you know it is capable of.

For example, I love the fact that my $200 Topping DAC outperforms many $4,000 DACs. Yes, I like to listen to music, but I also like to own objects about which there is a story which pleases me.
Here, here @milosz . I have a Sutherland Insight that brings me much joy because of the story of its engineering and manufacture. It's a great sounding unit, to boot, but other things please me about it, too, such as its design aesthetic.

Although I appreciate and heed the measurements for a device, the selection and enjoyment of hifi equipment is not entirely rational. I'm okay with that.

So, @bilzebubba , watch the measurements but select the device which speaks to you the most. For me, the Duo would be worth the cost difference of three Tone Poet pressings over the Solo. But, that's my mental math and I already own two upscale phonos!
 

bilzebubba

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2019
Messages
50
Likes
18
Thanks for all your help. Ordered the Duo from Crutchfield yesterday. Amazingly, it is due to arrive today!
 

rychupeja

New Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2022
Messages
2
Likes
0
I want to upgrade stylus in my setup that I use for digitizing hip-hop / dnb records (SL-1200, Cambridge Solo, E-Mu 0404 as an ADC) to Ortofon Concorde MK II Club which has an output voltage of 8mV and I'm wondering would the output signal from the Solo be too hot for my soundcard and would cause clipping in my recordings? Thanks for help.
 

DSJR

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 27, 2020
Messages
3,312
Likes
4,425
Location
Suffolk Coastal, UK
Can you use a Nightclub 'E' as even on 12" 45rpm singles, an elliptical should offer cleaner hf reproduction towards side end. It certainly should on 12" 33rpm 'EP's.
 

rychupeja

New Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2022
Messages
2
Likes
0
Unfortunately Nightclub E is not available to purchase where I live, I can buy a replacement needle, but not the whole stylus. Currently I use Ortofon Concorde PRO S, can I buy a Nightclub E needle and replace it in my PRO S? Would that work? Maybe I should look for styluses from different manufactures? Any recommendations for hh/dnb in similar price range as Ortofon Concorde MK II Club? Thanks
 

IPunchCholla

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
1,101
Likes
1,380
I just wanted to comment on the psychology of chasing numbers. When I bought the solo it was because the duo wasn’t available locally and I wanted it NOW! But man that RIAA curve bothers me. .5 is audible! (In a sine wave).

I use PEQ. So I tested out if . 5 is audible in music by mimicking the tone curve in this review and turning it in and off. Even sighted, I can’t tell the difference. In fact, I don’t think I could A/B differences of less than 1.5 dB. Double blind, I wouldn’t bet more than $10 I could do 3db if I had to spend more than a few seconds between comparisons.

I’m still bothered by it though and think about upgrading half the time I’m playing records, and this is with a setup where my vinyl goes through my computer, has pops removed and is EQ’d and phase aligned.

My irrationality with numbers…
 

cgallery

Active Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2020
Messages
126
Likes
90
I just wanted to comment on the psychology of chasing numbers. When I bought the solo it was because the duo wasn’t available locally and I wanted it NOW! But man that RIAA curve bothers me. .5 is audible! (In a sine wave).

I use PEQ. So I tested out if . 5 is audible in music by mimicking the tone curve in this review and turning it in and off. Even sighted, I can’t tell the difference. In fact, I don’t think I could A/B differences of less than 1.5 dB. Double blind, I wouldn’t bet more than $10 I could do 3db if I had to spend more than a few seconds between comparisons.

I’m still bothered by it though and think about upgrading half the time I’m playing records, and this is with a setup where my vinyl goes through my computer, has pops removed and is EQ’d and phase aligned.

My irrationality with numbers…

Someone mentioned that the RIAA difference likely boiled down to differences in how the Solo and Duo were measured. I knew this to be the case with SINAD, but this individual (an engineer) indicated it would also account for RIAA differences.

FWIW I gave-up chasing those #'s. I use a Realistic 42-2109 with a known hump from the subsonic filtering and a HF increase. My unit has the parts upgrade so maybe not as bad but still, I have phono stages with much, much flatter curves but I like the 42-2109.
 

rcstevensonaz

Active Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2020
Messages
183
Likes
147
Someone mentioned that the RIAA difference likely boiled down to differences in how the Solo and Duo were measured. I knew this to be the case with SINAD, but this individual (an engineer) indicated it would also account for RIAA differences.

FWIW I gave-up chasing those #'s. I use a Realistic 42-2109 with a known hump from the subsonic filtering and a HF increase. My unit has the parts upgrade so maybe not as bad but still, I have phono stages with much, much flatter curves but I like the 42-2109.
Cambridge Audio's site states that there is a difference in RIAA curve accuracy:
  • +/- 0.65dB 30Hz-20kHz : Solo
  • +/- 0.3dB 30Hz-50Hz : Duo
However, all other specifications listed on their website are the same for MM cartridges on both the Solo and Duo. (Hence, why the SINAD measurement difference between Duo and everything else was removed since there was a testing error in the original analysis.)
 

Angsty

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 11, 2020
Messages
1,862
Likes
2,215
Location
North Carolina, U.S.
Cambridge Audio's site states that there is a difference in RIAA curve accuracy:
  • +/- 0.65dB 30Hz-20kHz : Solo
  • +/- 0.3dB 30Hz-50Hz : Duo
However, all other specifications listed on their website are the same for MM cartridges on both the Solo and Duo. (Hence, why the SINAD measurement difference between Duo and everything else was removed since there was a testing error in the original analysis.)
I think the SINAD difference came from Amir testing the Duo with a 11 mV input vs. 5 mV for the Solo. The 11 mV input essentially confirmed the manufacturers specs, but was not in alignment with the standard Amir later created for testing based on member feedback. In the early days of phonostage testing, Amir was still grappling with the "right" way to test phonos versus DACs.
 

Rja4000

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
2,681
Likes
4,218
Location
Liège, Belgium
the SINAD difference came from Amir testing the Duo with a 11 mV input vs. 5 mV for the Solo
Obviously.
And 11mV is 6.8dB more than 5mV.
So Duo's SINAD at 5mV is probably around 90dB-7dB= 83dB.

As can be confirmed if you look at the THD+N vs level plot for the Duo:
The value for 5mV input should be for 1V / 11mV x 5 mV = 450mV output level.
I read (approx) 0.007% THD+N, which translates in 83dB SINAD.

Cambridge Audio Duo Phono Pre-amp THD vs Level MM Measurements.png

(This plot is copied from the Cambridge Duo review)
 

guenthi_r

Active Member
Joined
May 8, 2019
Messages
130
Likes
103
Location
Europe/Austria
"The MM preamp in both units is identical - the only difference between the two units is an additional moving coil preamp in the Duo." --Chris from Cambridge Audio

So, what accounts for the frequency response deviation, making it not a defeatured Duo?
Not true.
Take a look an the teardown pictures around the internet, the mm stage differs alot between solo/duo.
BTW, nice to see the good old NE5322 in these units :)
 

milosz

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
583
Likes
1,643
Location
Chicago
Not true.
Take a look an the teardown pictures around the internet, the mm stage differs alot between solo/duo.
BTW, nice to see the good old NE5322 in these units :)
Can you post some links to the photos?
 

guenthi_r

Active Member
Joined
May 8, 2019
Messages
130
Likes
103
Location
Europe/Austria
Thanks. They are laid out differently. but they could be the same circuit.
Not exactly, the duo has 7 transistors per channel in the signal path, the solo 2.
Anyway, the circuit´s looks very different to me.
 

milosz

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
583
Likes
1,643
Location
Chicago
Not exactly, the duo has 7 transistors per channel in the signal path, the solo 2.
Anyway, the circuit´s looks very different to me.
OK I did not go over it that closely; so, there is considerable difference.
 

cgallery

Active Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2020
Messages
126
Likes
90
Not exactly, the duo has 7 transistors per channel in the signal path, the solo 2.
Anyway, the circuit´s looks very different to me.

One of the pics in your links is the older 640-something, I think. The Solo and Duo look very similar.

Variations in RIAA conformity can boil down to tolerance specified for the caps/resistors used for EQ. When I modded my phono stage, I ordered parts at 1% tolerance, but the same components are available at 2%, 5%, and 10%, at lower costs.

So it isn't necessary for the circuit to vary, the tolerance on the components can vary and alter the performance enough to show in measurements.
 
Top Bottom