Phono stage comparisons (Lyngdorf 3400, Gold Note PH-10)

DT79

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
3,984
Reaction score
3,501
Points
1,258
A while back someone was asking on the Lyngdorf thread whether anyone had experience of how good the phono stage built in to the analogue module of the TDAI-3400 is, and it dawned on me that I had one but have never even tried it. I already had a very good phono preamp before I got my 3400 so never thought about using the in-built one. I had a bit of time on my hands (this was all before Xmas by the way, this is not how I spent my Xmas day :)) so I thought it would be interesting to do some comparisons to my Gold Note PH-10+PSU-10 (£2,900 together based on today’s prices - I didn’t pay that thank goodness).

The 3400 has a feature whereby you can see a handy input level display in -dB along with visual indicator bars allowing a somewhat objective measurement of the noise floor of each of the ‘stages. My initial intention was to include photos of the display showing this for each but it turns out that the display refresh frequency makes it very hard to photograph well. I’m assuming that this input level measurement is both a) accurate and b) a relevant way to ascertain the noise floor. If I’m wrong about the latter, perhaps someone can set me straight.

This will be a 2-part write up starting with the measurements and then followed by my completely subjective listening tests and conclusions.

My method was to equalise the output level of each stage/cartridge combo in order to do a fair test of both the noise floor and the musical end results. I used the LR balance test track on my Hi-Fi News test record with a volume setting of -27dB on the 3400, which gave a reading of ~60dB on my SPL meter. This was just an arbitrary reference level ascertained using an MM cartridge into the Gold Note as that’s what was already connected when I started off. I equalised the other combos preferring any gain adjustment present in the ‘stage (applies only to the GoldNote) and then the input level adjustment on the amp as necessary to get the output to ~60dB on the test tone.

MM cartridge is Ortofon 2M Black; MC is Ortofon Cadenza Black (obviously only relevant to the Gold Note). Rest of the system as per my signature.

For reference the noise floor of the amp (i.e. with nothing connected):
Digital input = -154dB (adjusting gain makes no difference)
Analogue input = -107dB (0dB input gain; adding gain seems to add same value to measured input level, which I think is what’s expected and indicates the noise floor stays the same as gain increases, or at least is only added to negligibly).

In addition to seeing what the 3400 registers as the noise floor, I also ascertained the point at which hiss/noise is audible at the main listening position. I’ve tried to be as objective as possible but because the 3400 volume increases in increments of 0.1dB attempting to find the absolute point of audibility was a bit too tedious for me so instead I went with the point that it’s significant enough to be ‘noticeable‘ and did my best to be consistent. For reference (as any 3400 volume setting I state will be arbitrary to you) listening level with my wife in room is probably -35dB to -30dB, listening on my own normally around -25dB to -20dB and getting carried away after a few beers maybe -15dB max.

Gold Note PH-10 + PSU-10 (reference) - MM
Capacitance 220pF (298pF total)
Gain = 45dB (0dB gain setting)
Amp input gain = 0
Noise floor = -68dB
Level at which hiss is noticeable = -18.0 dB

Lyngdorf TDAI-3400 built-in Phono stage (MM only)
Capacitance 100pF assumed* (178pF total)
Amp input gain = +5.5dB
Noise floor = -76dB (although with apparent random but inaudible ‘blips’ of noise)
Level at which hiss is noticeable = -10.0dB
*I can’t find the capacitance of the 3400 analogue board phono stage quoted anywhere, but the capacitance of the 1120 built-in phono stage is 100pF, so I‘ve gone with the assumption that they are the same.

Gold Note PH-10 + PSU-10 (reference) - MC (RCA)
Resistance 100ohm
Gain = 71dB (+6dB gain setting)
Amp input gain = 5.5dB
Noise floor = -64dB
Level at which hiss is noticeable = -17.0 dB

Gold Note PH-10 + PSU-10 (reference) - MC (XLR)
Resistance 100ohm
Gain = 65dB (0dB gain setting)
Amp input gain = 0dB
Noise floor = -64dB
Level at which hiss is noticeable = -19.0 dB


As you can see in terms of noise the winner hands-down is the Lyngdorf built-in phono stage. I’m pretty disappointed in the Gold Note in this respect given its cost and reputation. However it must be said that in all cases any audible background noise is irrelevant as soon as anything starts playing.

I haven’t quite finished the listening yet so my full thoughts will be in a later post, but I’ll give away a couple of spoilers. The 3400 ‘stage is not the better one sounding despite measuring the best. However it is remarkably good to the point where I would recommend that anyone who has one should not assume anything <£1k will actually be an upgrade.

Anyway, hope my ramblings are interesting/useful to someone.

Cheers.
 
Here are my very subjective thoughts on the sound in case this is useful to someone someday. I kept this simple, mainly listening to only 3 tracks on each. Dan Auerbach - Never in my Wildest Dreams (lovely recording, pretty stripped back but with lots of layers to the soundstage), Foo Fighters - Pretender, Let it Die (because they’re awesome tracks but busier, heavier and more of a challenge to reproduce coherently).

I have also added my impressions once I switched to the MC cartridge, which I really only did to compare the noise levels, but thought i might as well note my thoughts from listening while I was at it, so obviously that’s just a comparison between the two cartridges into the Gold Note

I was very impressed with the ‘3400 phono stage. In isolation there was really not much to fault.

These were my notes:
3400
Auerbach - Voice is pushed forward. Good level of details - very close To the GN. Bass is full but not quite as articulate - a little ‘loose’. Soundstage a touch congested and high frequencies not as smooth. Overall very good, very close to the GN.

Foo - In isolation really good. Bass solid and punchy. Dynamic swings a bit muted compared to GN. Glosses over some grime and detail - not unpleasant, but a bit less raw and vivid. Percussion a little softer and less metallic sounding. Bass and drums sound a little ‘rounded at the edges’.

Gold Note (MM)
Auerbach - Loads of detail in the voice. A real sense of the acoustic of the space. Guitar strings buzz with energy. You can really hear the decay on the percussion. Bass is full and physical and you can make out every note played.

Foo - returning after the 3400 PS, there is more energy. The soundstage sits a bit further back but more natural and wider. Fine detail sounds more clearly resolved.

Gold Note MC (via RCA)
Auerbach - every detail is most clearly resolved of anything yet. Soundstage very good. Hard to concentrate on analysing.

Foo - Best yet. Most dynamic. Real power in the bass. Absolutely buzzes with energy. Amazing clarity when things get busy, but not at the expense of the natural energy in the music.

Gold Note MC (via XLR)

Ever so slight additional clarity and resolution compared to RCA. Things like the crispness of cymbals, the articulacy of bass guitar.
 
As you can see in terms of noise the winner hands-down is the Lyngdorf built-in phono stage. I’m pretty disappointed in the Gold Note in this respect given its cost and reputation. However it must be said that in all cases any audible background noise is irrelevant as soon as anything starts playing.
I don't think I'm surprised by that. If the Lyngdorf does its A2D conversion first (I don't know if it does, but I think it would make sense), then it can presumably do the RIAA equalisation in the digital domain without all the noisy passive components that an analog RIAA equalisation needs?
 
I don't think I'm surprised by that. If the Lyngdorf does its A2D conversion first (I don't know if it does, but I think it would make sense), then it can presumably do the RIAA equalisation in the digital domain without all the noisy passive components that an analog RIAA equalisation needs?
I always thought the same, but no, as I understand it, it’s a traditional analogue RIAA eq. Then the a2d.
 
Do we know if it's the same unit as in the 1120?
 
Do we know if it's the same unit as in the 1120?
I‘ve never seen anything to confirm or deny that, and I haven’t gone to the trouble of asking Lyngdorf. I assumed the capacitance of the 3400 one is 100pF based on the fact that it is in the 1120 according to the spec. That could of course account from some of the difference between that and the Gold Note.

It would seem unlikely that they’d go to the trouble of creating a new design, but they might not be exactly the same as they probably integrated it into the main PCB in the 1120. That’s just pure speculation though.
 
Very interesting - that makes its low noise measurements especially impressive.
Indeed. So, do we think the Gold Note is on par but the Lyngdorf is particularly good, or should we expect better from the GN? It is all academic in the end as the noise floor of either is inaudible in any reasonable domestic use case, but just curious.
 
Thanks DT79, just saw your reply in the other thread. This is the information that I was looking for.
Happy Holidays
 
There are a few new kids on the block phono stage wise. Enter Classic Audio
Although this model is not available anymore a new Pro one is just about to be released. Something to investigate and look at.
 
Indeed. So, do we think the Gold Note is on par but the Lyngdorf is particularly good, or should we expect better from the GN? It is all academic in the end as the noise floor of either is inaudible in any reasonable domestic use case, but just curious.
It's an interesting question. Given that the upper limit for dynamic range on an LP is about 70dB, and most are thought to achieve only 55-65dB, I don't think this is a bad mark against the Gold Note at all. Maybe the designers were happy with what they achieved, and focused on linearity and other aspects?
 
I have the PH-10 with the PSU10, mine is whisper quiet. When I first bought it I was getting some strange interference via the phono circuit & out through the speakers (like a mild motorboat noise). The guilty party turned out to be my ethernet homeplugs. Once these were unplugged silence ruled. I did audition it against a couple of others (e.g.Cyrus Sig Phono +PSXR/2) plus a Clearaudio Balance V2 at £2500 - I preferred the Gold Note. Also nice people to deal with IME.
 
I had a minor issue with my external phone stage and have sent it back to the person who built it (it’s a valve DIY stage) who has kindly agreed to service/fix it. as such I’ve been using the internal stage in the 1120 for the last two weeks. I’d forgotten how good it was. More detail, better imaging and I prefer the top end to my valve stage. Although the sound stage is better is on the valve stage as are the mids.

I prefer my external stage (just) but could happily live with the internal stage in the 1120 if I had to.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom