Lyra Lambda Etna vs. Lambda Etna SL

[lem321]

I've developed a problem with my Etna SL recently (deviated cantilever) and was planning to upgrade to the new Lambda model. My time with the Etna SL has been really enjoyable, and at times, magical! However, I'm wondering whether the non-SL version might be a better fit. As noted in my signature details, I have an all-tube ARC system. Using the balanced output from the phono section to the line stage produces 73dB gain and no undue "noise." I've toyed with the idea of using a SUT to boost the Etna SL's 0.25 mv output but would prefer to stick with what I have. Reviewer comments have recommended that phono stages with "current amplification" are preferred over voltage-sensing types. I don't know if my ARC 3SE is one or the other. I also have a Koetsu Vermillion which has an even lower output (0.2 mv) and sounds fine to me.

Any opinions regarding the SL vs. non-SL Lyra Etna - especially from those who have experience with the ARC 3SE Phono and Lyra cartridges? Thoughts regarding going with a SUT?

Thanks in advance for any advice or help you can provide.

 

[tima]

Hi Lem,-- not his best work, but it covers your topics ...

Lyra Etna Lambda and Etna Lambda SL Phono Cartridges - The Audio Beat - www.TheAudioBeat.com

read audio reviews, ratings, and user opinions on audio equipment before you buy an audio system

www.theaudiobeat.com

Using the balanced output from the phono section to the line stage produces 73dB gain and no undue "noise."

Fwiw, balanced output from the 3SE is 45db low and 67db high. I don't think you need more gain for .25mv output or a SUT. Nice amps.

To what type of music do you listen?

 

[lem321]

Hi Lem,-- not his best work, but it covers your topics ...

Lyra Etna Lambda and Etna Lambda SL Phono Cartridges - The Audio Beat - www.TheAudioBeat.com

read audio reviews, ratings, and user opinions on audio equipment before you buy an audio system

www.theaudiobeat.com

Fwiw, balanced output from the 3SE is 45db low and 67db high. I don't think you need more gain for .25mv output or a SUT. Nice amps.

To what type of music do you listen?

Thanks Tim. Yes, I read Roy Gregory's review in TAB, one of several that recommend that most people should go with the standard Etna/Atlas, and not the SL versions unless one has a system that is geared toward optimizing a very low output cartridge. However, without actually hearing both cartridges in my system, it's a bit of a guessing game.

According to the ARC 3SE manual, the Gain (is) Selectable 51 dB (Low) and 73 dB (High) at 1kHz BAL; 45 dB (Low) and 67 dB (High) at 1kHz SE. (MC and MM compatible). 73 dB sounds plenty loud to me.

The amps are great and work well with the 6SE and 3SE. My musical tastes vary from jazz (e.g. Blue Note), to female vocal (e.g. Shelby Lynn), 60-70's rock (Blood, Sweat and Tears, Neil Young) and some classical - typical audiophile stuff! No metal or modern hip-hop. Thanks Tim, always appreciate your comments.

 

[tima]

Yes, you're right about the gain - I should have known that since I had the Ref 3 in-house for a few months. Imo, ARC works great with ARC.

 

[mtemur]

Any opinions regarding the SL vs. non-SL Lyra Etna

I didn’t compare the two side by side but if the designer/builder hasn’t messed up (which is highly unlikely) and under normal conditions lower output/impedance (SL) is a better cartridge than regular.

Thoughts regarding going with a SUT

IMHO owning a good SUT is the way to go with MC cartridges especially with low impedance ones. IME SUTs sound better compared to active gain stages.

Reviewer comments have recommended that phono stages with "current amplification" are preferred over voltage-sensing types. I don't know if my ARC 3SE is one or the other.

ARC is a “voltage amplification” kind of phono pre.

According to the ARC 3SE manual, the Gain (is) Selectable 51 dB (Low) and 73 dB (High) at 1kHz BAL; 45 dB (Low) and 67 dB (High) at 1kHz SE. (MC and MM compatible). 73 dB sounds plenty loud to me.

Balanced output on ARC 3SE phono has 6dB more gain than single ended output but if you’re connecting it to a balanced pre it will require more gain for it’s balanced inputs compared to the single ended ones. The 6dB difference between balanced and single ended is equal to 2 times the voltage output of single ended. It’s due to existence of additional inverted signal in balanced design. I’m not sure cause I haven’t own an ARC equipment but I guess it’s a high possibility if you use all single ended cabling (from tonearm to power amps) instead of balanced you will get same SPL on speakers. If that’s the case then you practically get 67dB from ARC phono. Again if that’s the case alternatively you increase it to 73dB if you use balanced output of phono and convert it to single ended on input of pre by using xlr to rca connectors.

 

[arnies]

Hi,

I also owned and enjoyed very much the Lyra Etna SL cartridge in my system. Before purchasing it I compared it in my system to the Lyra Atlas cartridge and I much preferred the Etna SL to the Atlas. My phono stage is the CH Precision P1 which does have current amplification. When the Lambda versions became available, I had the opportunity to compare my Etna SL to both the new Lambda Etna SL and the new Lyra Lambda Atlas SL. The new Lambda Etna SL was definitely better than my original Etna SL but this time around, the new Lambda Atlas SL was in my opinion significantly better than either my Etna SL and the new Lambda Etna SL cartridge. The Lambda SL versions still have the same .25mv output. If it was me and I didn't have a current driven phono stage, I would spend the extra dollars to get the Lambda Atlas cartridge (not the SL version) and not spend money on SUT's, etc. Just my thoughts.
Arnie

 

[lem321]

I didn’t compare the two side by side but if the designer/builder hasn’t messed up (which is highly unlikely) and under normal conditions lower output/impedance (SL) is a better cartridge than regular.


IMHO owning a good SUT is the way to go with MC cartridges especially with low impedance ones. IME SUTs sound better compared to active gain stages.


ARC is a “voltage amplification” kind of phono pre.


Balanced output on ARC 3SE phono has 6dB more gain than single ended output but if you’re connecting it to a balanced pre it will require more gain for it’s balanced inputs compared to the single ended ones. The 6dB difference between balanced and single ended is equal to 2 times the voltage output of single ended. It’s due to existence of additional inverted signal in balanced design. I’m not sure cause I haven’t own an ARC equipment but I guess it’s a high possibility if you use all single ended cabling (from tonearm to power amps) instead of balanced you will get same SPL on speakers. If that’s the case then you practically get 67dB from ARC phono. Again if that’s the case alternatively you increase it to 73dB if you use balanced output of phono and convert it to single ended on input of pre by using xlr to rca connectors.

Mtemur,
Thank you very much for your response to my questions. Much appreciated. Regarding the use of SUTs, I know there is a camp of LOMC analog users, who feel SUTs are the preferred way to go. Do you have any specific models that you particularly like?
I'm currently using RCA from tonearm to phono and XLR from phono to the balanced in of the line stage thereby getting 73 dB. I'm still not sure why there is a preference for a current amplification over one with voltage amplification. Is one inherently better?
Wilson

 

[Solypsa]

At 1.5r the Etna SL is perfect for both current sensing phono OR SUT

Even a high ratio 1:40 SUT still gives 20x load and could be interesting ( *if* MM input of phono could handle that high of input level. In the 10mV range ).

As an aside aren't Lyra carts on like a 6m + backorder?

 

[lem321]

Hi,

I also owned and enjoyed very much the Lyra Etna SL cartridge in my system. Before purchasing it I compared it in my system to the Lyra Atlas cartridge and I much preferred the Etna SL to the Atlas. My phono stage is the CH Precision P1 which does have current amplification. When the Lambda versions became available, I had the opportunity to compare my Etna SL to both the new Lambda Etna SL and the new Lyra Lambda Atlas SL. The new Lambda Etna SL was definitely better than my original Etna SL but this time around, the new Lambda Atlas SL was in my opinion significantly better than either my Etna SL and the new Lambda Etna SL cartridge. The Lambda SL versions still have the same .25mv output. If it was me and I didn't have a current driven phono stage, I would spend the extra dollars to get the Lambda Atlas cartridge (not the SL version) and not spend money on SUT's, etc. Just my thoughts.
Arnie

Hey Arnie,
Thanks for your input on the questions posed in my original post, much appreciated. Your assessment of how the new Lambda SL versions compared to your original Etna SL was very helpful. Your reasoning with regards to choosing a Lambda SL vs. a non-SL Lambda makes a lot sense.
A couple of questions:
-What makes a current amplification phono stage better than one that is voltage-based?
-What were you hearing in the new Lambda Atlas SL that was preferred over the Lambda Etna SL? I had always preferred the original Etna SL over the Atlas given that my room was very "live" and felt the "mellower" Etna would be a better fit. What has changed?
Wilson

 

[lem321]

At 1.5r the Etna SL is perfect for both current sensing phono OR SUT

Even a high ratio 1:40 SUT still gives 20x load and could be interesting ( *if* MM input of phono could handle that high of input level. In the 10mV range ).

As an aside aren't Lyra carts on like a 6m + backorder?

Thanks Solypsa for your comments. Do you have a preference for a current sensing phono vs. using a SUT? As posed earlier, why is the current sensing phono preferred (over voltage sensing)? Any particular SUTs you favor? Yes, it's about a 6 month backlog for orders - yikes!
Wilson

 

[mtemur]

I'm currently using RCA from tonearm to phono and XLR from phono to the balanced in of the line stage thereby getting 73 dB. I'm still not sure why there is a preference for a current amplification over one with voltage amplification. Is one inherently better?

cable termination and signal topology always cause a confusion. balanced and single ended are two types of topologies and xlr and rca are cable connection types. normally rca termination is used with single ended and xlr is used with balanced but tonearm cable is balanced even if it's ended with rca. just like the tonearm cable mc cartridges and SUTs are balanced too (normally). so you are actually using balanced connection from cartridge to the output of the preamplifier (if both phono and pre are designed in true balanced topology).

I don't think voltage amplification is better than current amplification or vice versa. IMHO implementation is more important than topology. I always favored or I should say my ears preferred the SUT+MM tube phono combo over the others.

Regarding the use of SUTs, I know there is a camp of LOMC analog users, who feel SUTs are the preferred way to go. Do you have any specific models that you particularly like?

I heard some of them and the ones I like/prefer are silver Kondo, silver Audio Consulting, silver EMT, silver AN UK and silver Consolidated Audio.

 

[lem321]

cable termination and signal topology always cause a confusion. balanced and single ended are two types of topologies and xlr and rca are cable connection types. normally rca termination is used with single ended and xlr is used with balanced but tonearm cable is balanced even if it's ended with rca. just like the tonearm cable mc cartridges and SUTs are balanced too (normally). so you are actually using balanced connection from cartridge to the output of the preamplifier (if both phono and pre are designed in true balanced topology).

I don't think voltage amplification is better than current amplification or vice versa. IMHO implementation is more important than topology. I always favored or I should say my ears preferred the SUT+MM tube phono combo over the others.


I heard some of them and the ones I like/prefer are silver Kondo, silver Audio Consulting, silver EMT, silver AN UK and silver Consolidated Audio.

Great explanation of the single-ended and balanced topologies. Thanks also for the SUT recommendations.

 

[Solypsa]

I lean towards 'SUT + Tubes' but reckon there are many roads.

One thing I like about SUT's is that they are passive and should last a lifetime ( and be resellable too ).

As far as recommends I really like the EM/IA silver ( no disrespects to the copper ) but in the end it comes down to synergy. If you can demo/ borrow a few that's the best way.

I am testing some made in USA custom step ups next few months and have RADA 1:40 SUT in hand doing the same so its always evolving

Thanks Solypsa for your comments. Do you have a preference for a current sensing phono vs. using a SUT? As posed earlier, why is the current sensing phono preferred (over voltage sensing)? Any particular SUTs you favor? Yes, it's about a 6 month backlog for orders - yikes!
Wilson

 

[lem321]

I lean towards 'SUT + Tubes' but reckon there are many roads.

One thing I like about SUT's is that they are passive and should last a lifetime ( and be resellable too ).

As far as recommends I really like the EM/IA silver ( no disrespects to the copper ) but in the end it comes down to synergy. If you can demo/ borrow a few that's the best way.

I am testing some made in USA custom step ups next few months and have RADA 1:40 SUT in hand doing the same so its always evolving

Solypsa,
Thanks for your recommendations.
Wilson

 

[Kcin]

cable termination and signal topology always cause a confusion. balanced and single ended are two types of topologies and xlr and rca are cable connection types. normally rca termination is used with single ended and xlr is used with balanced but tonearm cable is balanced even if it's ended with rca. just like the tonearm cable mc cartridges and SUTs are balanced too (normally). so you are actually using balanced connection from cartridge to the output of the preamplifier (if both phono and pre are designed in true balanced topology).

I don't think voltage amplification is better than current amplification or vice versa. IMHO implementation is more important than topology. I always favored or I should say my ears preferred the SUT+MM tube phono combo over the others.


I heard some of them and the ones I like/prefer are silver Kondo, silver Audio Consulting, silver EMT, silver AN UK and silver Consolidated Audio.

Totally agree on this,

I have the Etna SL here on the Aesthetix Io. No issue with drive or dynamics. Same with low output Koetsu's here.

With respect to balanced tone arm cable connections RCA is sometimes better depending how the preamp phono handles balanced--- Allnic comes to mind. Allnic soundsexcellent SE so-- like everything in audio it depends on implementation

Further, if you want to believe connector producers such as KLE and mundorf big clunky metal connectors- even from the best producers- are a big no no for small signals- so xlr's don't make sense- especially in phono position. I believe this to be true in my experiments.

Current amplification should be theoretically better for low impedance cartridges as essentially a dead short is driven by the cartridge and we don't have worry about load artifacts with voltage amplification.

Having said all this implementation is everything and don't take anything as gospel. No one talks about it, but the CH P1 in voltage amplification mode is horrid IMO regardless of how many power supplies you tack on to it. Current mode it is excellent.

I have a friend with Etna SL on a Ref phono and 6SE --- its a great combo.


YMMV

 

[Kcin]

I lean towards 'SUT + Tubes' but reckon there are many roads.

One thing I like about SUT's is that they are passive and should last a lifetime ( and be resellable too ).

As far as recommends I really like the EM/IA silver ( no disrespects to the copper ) but in the end it comes down to synergy. If you can demo/ borrow a few that's the best way.

I am testing some made in USA custom step ups next few months and have RADA 1:40 SUT in hand doing the same so its always evolving

Nice -will you give us some of your impressions based on your tests?

I lean toward fully active - if it is done correctly- very difficult and expensive for the ordinary designer to get active correct. For example, Atmasphere has moved away from SUTs in its premier phono stage and believes active is superior now. MP1 is a phenomenal phono stage. Aesthetix is all active.

It would be much easier to keep the gain at 50 db and switch in a SUT

Having said that. There are times where active is just not going to work in existing designs for certain cartridge choices and a SUT is a good option.

 

[lem321]

Nice -will you give us some of your impressions based on your tests?

I lean toward fully active - if it is done correctly- very difficult and expensive for the ordinary designer to get active correct. For example, Atmasphere has moved away from SUTs in its premier phono stage and believes active is superior now. MP1 is a phenomenal phono stage. Aesthetix is all active.

It would be much easier to keep the gain at 50 db and switch in a SUT

Having said that. There are times where active is just not going to work in existing designs for certain cartridge choices and a SUT is a good option.

There are times where active is just not going to work in existing designs for certain cartridge choices and a SUT is a good option.
How does one know when a SUT is needed vs. just using an active phono stage other than through experimentation? As noted in your post, the Etna SL works well with your Aesthetix IO as does your friend's Etna SL with the Ref Phono and 6SE. Did you try inserting a SUT to compare?

 

[Kcin]

There are times where active is just not going to work in existing designs for certain cartridge choices and a SUT is a good option.
How does one know when a SUT is needed vs. just using an active phono stage other than through experimentation? As noted in your post, the Etna SL works well with your Aesthetix IO as does your friend's Etna SL with the Ref Phono and 6SE. Did you try inserting a SUT to compare?

SUT destroys what Aesthetix does well. Aesthetix has tons of drive so may not be typical.

How do you know?- well you try. Here is where a good dealer is helpful. Otherwise , you buy and try and move on. Its an expensive hobby !

On the REF 3SE phono in my friend's system. I am not sure if he ever tried a SUT. Frankly , with that kind of a system I am not sure you would. I will ask him.

 

[lem321]

SUT destroys what Aesthetix does well. Aesthetix has tons of drive so may not be typical.

How do you know?- well you try. Here is where a good dealer is helpful. Otherwise , you buy and try and move on. Its an expensive hobby !

On the REF 3SE phono in my friend's system. I am not sure if he ever tried a SUT. Frankly , with that kind of a system I am not sure you would. I will ask him.

Kcin,
Thanks for your comments. Can you clarify how a "SUT destroys what the Aesthetix does well." By "tons of drive," do you mean its 80dB gain? Yes, it would interesting to see if your friend has ever tried a SUT with the Etna SL as I have the same electronics.

 

[Kcin]

Kcin,
Thanks for your comments. Can you clarify how a "SUT destroys what the Aesthetix does well." By "tons of drive," do you mean its 80dB gain? Yes, it would interesting to see if your friend has ever tried a SUT with the Etna SL as I have the same electronics.

Hi at 80db that is 50v out- so yes. More than that dynamic headroom that the dual power supplies support is really incredible.

On the SUT - any SUT that I used blunted leading edges to some extent and lost detail. Quiet yes-but information is lost. Consequence with active is that you are prone to noise and at the mercy of linearity of the design - so there are no free lunches.

SUT is definitely more forgiving from a design perspective