EAR Yoshino 834L Deluxe Preamp Review

[AudioSceptic]

Reminds my of that Top Gear episode about defunct british sports car brands, where every time something on the cars falls apart, they go "It's a feature!!"

Oh, yes! And they're not faults, they add character!

 

[fricc]

Many people buy these products because they read nothing but positive praise for them. So they automatically think they must be better than solid state preamps. The data in this review should give them strong pause. This is why I test them.

I hear you Amir, and I'm not into valves myself, but I find that I somehow resonate with the sentiment that there might be more to this kind of product that the format of this review might reveal.

Ultimately audio products are made for listening to music, and they are (should be?) optimized to operate well in a reasonable range of input/output values.

In this particular case I find that minimizing distortion around 100mV is probably quite a reasonable choice, as this is likely where most of the signal energy is centered in audio content. If the loudest (10x) signals - which amount to a very small fraction of the signal itself - end up having a bit more 2nd THD, that might not be a big deal and probably most people would have a hard time hearing that at all.
In this respect this pre seems to be pretty reasonably designed and I bet it would sound just fine to most people.

Personally I find that the current trend of expecting lab instrument noise and distortion levels from audio products to be a bit out of touch. Yes, it obviously can be achieved as the growing list of products reviewed here show us, but is it actually useful? Can I really hear the difference between 108dB and 120dB SINAD? Does the rest my audio chain (speakers, rooms, family) even manage to reproduce anything with better that 80dB of dynamic range?

On another angle, a Casio digital watch keeps time more precisely than a mechanical Rolex, but is it actually a better watch? What does the increased precision really bring? Products can be enjoyed at many levels, sometimes it is just the fascination for a great piece of engineering done with specific constraint (valves, discrete components, boutique DACs).

I think the value of this reviews is really to reveal, and maybe appreciate, the engineering effort that went into the products, within their intended range of operation. There indeed is a lot of snake oil out there, and lots of mostly empty boxes with heavy metal cases for "substance". IMHO this particular pre seems to be quite well engineered valve implementation.

I've been an aspiring audiophile since I was a teenager in the late 70s, and I had many HIFI systems over the years. Today I have a pair of wireless KEF LS50 II with a matching KEF subwoofer. Absolutely no fuss and it sounds amazing in my smallish "entertainment" area. Of the old stuff I still have my pretty large original vinyl collection from the 70-80s, my vintage Thorens 160 and a Shure V15V cart. I still listen to vinyl a lot, through my wireless KEFs. I love the sound, I find that the old mastering of the original records works better than most modern remasters and CD renditions. Aside from surface noise, the level of fidelity of these recordings is quite outstanding.

Well, this note ended up longer than I had anticipated, I wonder if there is anyone else out there that feels similarly.
- Fabio

 

[Scytales]

I cherish these RCA CD and SACD recordings for the aesthetics of their sound recording produced with two or three microphones, which gives them a very natural and credible character, but the timbres are a little raw and lack the finesse obtained more near us with today's best recordings.

And who says timbres that are a little harsh, a little raw... says background noise and distortions: the tube electronics of the 50s, plus the tape recorders of the time and the magnetic tape could not do better. The Dolby came to help... And it's the same thing with the Mercury of the late 1950s and early 1960s...

Same as far as i'm concerned.

I would add to this list the 3 channels recordings made by Everest in the 50s and 60s. I currently listen to them thanks to their DVD-A reissues. They do have the same properties you rightfully described. They are less of a success as far as faithfulness to a natural orchestral sound-stage is concerned, but nonetheless enjoyable.

 

[AudioSceptic]

WHAT?????????

There's a whole jazz genre of superb recordings made in the 50's and I remember being blown away by a CD of Ella & Louis, first recorded in I think, 1952!

Is it <https://www.discogs.com/master/173462-Ella-Fitzgerald-And-Louis-Armstrong-Ella-And-Louis>? It also sounds stunning on vinyl (LP12, of course!). How is that possible with what they had then?

 

[Doodski]

I hear you Amir, and I'm not into valves myself, but I find that I somehow resonate with the sentiment that there might be more to this kind of product that the format of this review might reveal.

ASR is a science based website and not a subjective tube lovers forum. I'm surprised we are even having this chat because the tube gear is here for a reason and that's to be tested in the same way that other gear is tested.

 

[Deleted member 21219]

ASR is a science based website and not a subjective tube lovers forum.

That seems to be changing .... and not for the better.

Jim

 

[JiiPee]

Regarding the performance and price:

- There is a certain tendency on this forum to exaggerate the importance of SOTA technical performance. A piece of equipment is declared horrible because of a measurement result that in real life is more or less insignificant, and then it receives the froth at the mouth wrath from the righteous pharisees.

- EAR 834L has been on the market place already for over two decades. We may think that it is overpriced, but apparently the market does not think so, as it is still in production. Also, there has been no flood of second hand pieces on the market, so apparently the owners have been quite happy with it.

 

[Sokel]

I cherish these RCA CD and SACD recordings for the aesthetics of their sound recording produced with two or three microphones, which gives them a very natural and credible character, but the timbres are a little raw and lack the finesse obtained more near us with today's best recordings.

And who says timbres that are a little harsh, a little raw... says background noise and distortions: the tube electronics of the 50s, plus the tape recorders of the time and the magnetic tape could not do better. The Dolby came to help... And it's the same thing with the Mercury of the late 1950s and early 1960s...

Same as far as i'm concerned.

I would add to this list the 3 channels recordings made by Everest in the 50s and 60s. I currently listen to them thanks to their DVD-A reissues. They do have the same properties you rightfully described. They are less of a success as far as faithfulness to a natural orchestral sound-stage is concerned, but nonetheless enjoyable.

We would have to be ashamed if things wouldn't improve in 60-70 years time,that's the logical.
Of course there's a gazillion better recordings these days.

Thing is that at that specific time it was not only the recordings (which they are grande with the means of the era,there's also far worst ones in the years to come).
It was also a galaxy of geniuses under this label,performances are amongst the best ever.People with deep understanding of the plays,conducting world class musicians with iron hand.

 

[AudioSceptic]

I don't believe/recall listening to anything with that much harmonic distortion so I can't say how different it sounds. The harmonic distortions I have heard are very low, possibly even below my hearing threshold.

For those who has gear with high harmonic distortion, can you please explain to me what does harmonic distortion sounds like? How would you describe it?

You can play with single tones and varying distortion using Audacity or REW. I think you can also add distortion to existing files as "effects" but I haven't tried that.
<https://www.audacityteam.org/>
<https://www.roomeqwizard.com/>

 

[Scytales]

We would have to be ashamed if things wouldn't improve in 60-70 years time,that's the logical.
Of course there's a gazillion better recordings these days.

Thing is that at that specific time it was not only the recordings (which they are grande with the means of the era,there's also far worst ones in the years to come).
It was also a galaxy of geniuses under this label,performances are amongst the best ever.People with deep understanding of the plays,conducting world class musicians with iron hand.

Yes. Except Charles Munch, for instance, was not an iron hand by any means. ;-)

 

[Sokel]

For those who has gear with high harmonic distortion, can you please explain to me what does harmonic distortion sounds like? How would you describe it?

Even if you know well how it sounds (speakers take care of this) you can try it yourself:

Announcing beta-test of PKHarmonic VST plugin

As discussed in a separate thread, this is a beta-test of a VST (Windows) plugin to allow you to dial-in an arbitrary amount of harmonic distortion while playing music with your favorite music player. Now you can enjoy that second harmonic without investing many thousands of $$$ into a tube...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Sokel]

Yes. Except Charles Munch, for instance, was not an iron hand by any means. ;-)

There's always exceptions and people relying in other people's good will.
And then there's Reiner,luck and good will is unknown words to him

 

[Brab]

ASR is a science based website and not a subjective tube lovers forum.

That seems to be changing .... and not for the better.

Jim

I would correct that to a numbers based or scientistic forum. There is little real science here. This is not a criticism. There is much of value in this forum. I'm just being didactically precise.

 

[Dialectic]

Despite the lackluster measured performance, I like the look of the preamp, and the one EAR Yoshino system I heard (in a long listening session circa 2016), with Rockport speakers, sounded excellent on small-scale acoustic music. The EAR Yoshino CD player in that system measured abysmally, if memory serves.

 

[fpitas]

There is little real science here.

Oh really? Do tell.

 

[ocinn]

BTW has someone ever done a controlled listening test with a number of people to prove or disprove the preference of added second harmonic distortion?
And you can get this with even a free plugin software (combined with soundsource if you use a mac for example)
You don’t have to pay thousands

Listening Test

www.klippel.de

Have fun! Distribution graph is shown at the end.

 

[the_brunx]

are the audio professionals who add harmonic distortion to vocals, instruments etc all wrong?

 

[fpitas]

are the audio professionals who add harmonic distortion to vocals, instruments etc all wrong?

No, but that's creation. They add guitar tracks, too. Would you want everything to sound like a guitar?

 

[the_brunx]

No, but that's creation. They add guitar tracks, too. Would you want everything to sound like a guitar?

They do it for vocals too

 

[computer-audiophile]

Oh really? Do tell.

Let me try - even if the point did not come from me.

The main task of scientists is to expand existing knowledge through research. Therefore, they need to develop new theories, methods and protocols to understand or better unravel a previously unknown phenomenon. Once this knowledge is available, it is up to engineers to use already established principles to find technological solutions.