Preference for separate phono stages?

What about the Aesthetix Janus? I hear good things about it but have no first hand experience. Anybody who does?

Life is full of compromises. Otherwise we all would have four chassis monoblock amps and four chassis line stages and phono stages. The only one who can answer this is you. Yes, isolation offers a better advantage. The questions are: How much better? Can you hear it? How much are you willing to spend for it?

Some will spend hundreds of thousands to get that last 0.5% of sonic purity. Others will spend much less to get most of the way there. As with all things in the audio world, the law of diminishing returns kicks in early and hard.

Cheers,
John

To contribute some more to this topic:

The best people to ask are designers of full function preamps on why they choose a single box solution. Talking to Allen Wright, he thought the main advantage was that one could avoid one more gain/buffer stage and the interconnect when combining pre and phono. According to Allen the problem with separate phono stage solutions is that they should be able to work with a variety of different preamps, requiring different driving and impedance-matching capabilities.

Finally from a noise perspective, I don't quite see the advantage of a separate case. One could always separate out the phono stage in a different shielded section of the preamp and keep paths to a minimum. The only thing that may be worth putting outboard seems to be the power supply IMO. I don't think that putting everything into separate cases is ideal, simplicity and shorter signal paths can have their own advantages, thus a single box solution doesn't necessarily mean a compromise.

Of course, the biggest advantage in separate phono stages IMO is the flexibility. Not only do you have more flexibility in matching pre and phono separately, but most external phono stages have more loading options too.

I find it depends on the phono cartridge. In many cases a separate phono stage w. the obvious benefits will lead to some sonic advantages. In my case, this includes a purity of signal that readibly apparent. I think some from the Doshi crowd could chime in, having owned both full function preamps and them having the separates.

Dear friends: This subject is an almost misunderstood one for many of us, well this is only a simple opinion.

Like in the cartridges that we usually see it like a stand alone performer and now we know that at least the tonearm is an intimate part of it and form a stand alone UNIT the phono stage IMHO it is not a stand alone audio link but part of a UNIT along the line stage ( I'm not talking here in commercial/marketing point of view. ).

It does not matters how good is your phono stage the cartridge signal must pass through a line stage ( before the amplifier ) too so the line stage must be at least at the same level quality performance of the phono stage doing no degradation to the cartridge signal.

The relationship between the phono stage and line stage is so intimate that both units must be " transparent " ( at the same quality level ) to the cartridge signal, it must be synergy between the phono stage and line stage and by synergy I'm reffering to same quality level and the synergy in electrical terms, not the usualy and wrong synergy that many people talk about where the errors in one audio item help to " cover "/compensate for the errors on the other unit: this is not synergy but a mistmatch.

Now, IMHO it is not easy to have a Phonolinepreamp ( integral unit ) because the designer must be a good one in line stage and in phono stage too where both designs has its own and unique challenges.

I can't see advantages on separate units and everything the same a Phonolinepreamp ( integral unit ) IMHO is the best way to go. I think that the " key " is on the phono-line stages quality design and certainly IMHO it does not depends on the phono cartridge like Dgad posted.

I know that everyone has its own opinion in the subject and it will be interesting to hear it.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.