JSmith
Master Contributor
grumpy old man yelling at the sky
Only joking... resistance was futile.
JSmith
grumpy old man yelling at the sky
Sorry, I missed that. I edited my post.Maybe unless you read it for the fourth time in under 20 posts?
No, my apologies!Sorry, I missed that. I edited my post.
If one reads and comments on a thread from the front and one is many pages behind, one's posts when answering will appear redundant when reading in real time, as your response may answer a question in the following page 10 more times. That's happened to me when reading an old thread.Nothing unusual nowadays. I'm a member of a hiking group and answered a member question the other day about trails at a particular location. Well every other poster, about 20 of them, provided the exact same answers. You'd think people could just read the previous posts and add detail if necessary.
Now watch me get called out for being a grumpy old man yelling at the sky or some shit.
50 mv was at 1 kHz. It progressively got worse as frequencies went up.In this case the unit clips at 50mv and the concern was noted. But I don't think the same concern was expressed for the more expensive Pluto 2? Or was it?
The operation selling Rek O Kut has been around since at least the late '70s. So it's not something new. I don't know how they came about the name... whether the principals were part of the original group, or otherwise acquired it. Most of their production appears to be geared toward the archivalist... variable speed record players (up to 90 rpm) with the capability to play oversized discs, and so forth.Why on earth would someone feel compelled to resurrect the long defunct Rek-O-Kut brand????? Who, aside from some old HiFi nuts even remembers that brand???? They were one of the better manufacturers of turntables in the 1950s, but who the hell cares now????
Astonishing.
I literally haven't run across the name for decades, so I assumed that they were like Altec Lansing, an old and respected brand name which was bought on the cheap in order to market cheap stuff.The operation selling Rek O Kut has been around since at least the late '70s. So it's not something new. I don't know how they came about the name... whether the principals were part of the original group, or otherwise acquired it. Most of their production appears to be geared toward the archivalist... variable speed record players (up to 90 rpm) with the capability to play oversized discs, and so forth.
Back in the day (I'm doing this from memory so take it FWIW) I seem to recall the original brand being bought by another 'major' US based hi-fi oriented company, but that it was too little too late, and with the introduction of inexpensive Japanese DD, the US turntable market moved off shore. I could have that all wrong, and in any case I'm not inclined to research it.
However it was/is, the niche the current company occupies is probably not inconsistent with the original 'broadcast' orientation of the historical company.
50 mv was at 1 kHz. It progressively got worse as frequencies went up.
But yes, this is newer development/commentary in my testing.
I literally haven't run across the name for decades, so I assumed that they were like Altec Lansing, an old and respected brand name which was bought on the cheap in order to market cheap stuff.
I'm not familiar with TCC (who are they?).If you look at the back of the unit, it is a dead ringer for the stuff coming from TCC (the phonopreamps.com guys).
Who actually designed it is anyone's guess.
For the archivist and/or more serious collector, the company offers a device that is inserted downstream from the RIAA stage, and compensates for the various LP 'curves' found in pre RIAA discs. Before standardization, some preamps had this function built in, such as the '50s McIntosh C-108.
The Puffin also offers a wide range of 'curves' for non-RIAA recordings, or you can roll your own.
View attachment 207567
I'd have to think this through... The Rek O Kut 're-equalizer' goes after the RIAA stage, in the signal path. So that means the device is modding an already formatted signal.
Yes, you'd want to only use the curve which complements the curve which was used to cut the record. That's the way it was done in the old days. Using RIAA and then adding something else on top of that would only introduce more complexity and potential for degredation of the signal.So with these pre-1954 non-standard records, wouldn't you want to bypass the RIAA EQ altogether?
The Devialet stage offers different options as well, you must have more options for alternative EQ than almost anyone else in the world.The Puffin also offers a wide range of 'curves' for non-RIAA recordings, or you can roll your own.
View attachment 207567