Sound quality then - well this is where it gets difficult and I am not sure if I have the vocabulary to fully explain:-
Yes it has a full, yet controlled bass register, yes it has an extended yet sweet upper register, yes it has a clear midrange, yes it has a good transient response and dynamics, yes it has a wide, deep and high soundstage, yes it has PRaT (sorry but I do hate that term), yes it's quiet but then again so does the phono stage in my Musical Fidelity A3.2 Integrated amp. It has proven just how good the phono stage in the A3.2 really is and you have to spend a lot to better it.
Is the Rialto better than the A3.2 internal stage? - undoubtedly "yes". My initial reaction was slightly subdued as it does not "push" any aspect at you.
The best way I can describe its performance is that it just seems to "disappear" as do the speakers and you end up just listening to the music with individual parts flowing into primary focus when the artist/engineers wants and then seamlessly flowing back into the mix (but you can still follow each musical strand easily with incredible low level detail) in a way the A3.2 could not manage and adds a very small amount of sparkle and air that gives better clues on the acoustics of the location (or the amount of reverb added by the engineer). It's growing on me with every listen and has me digging through record just to try it, highly addictive.
Did a quick white noise plot before moving leads and then after through the Rialto for comparison. The slightly falling response I thought was my cartridge may well be the A3.2. It would appear the Rialto has a flatter, wider bandwidth (also both show some digital artefacts from the encoding process).
I repeated a track from my recent stylus evaluation so on the following link file QJANC11MP64.wav is a 96/24 bit via the A3.2 phono stage and QJANCBPRR75.wav via the Rialto both with the Paratraced MP-11 Boron.https://www.dropbox.com/sh/xemqhttgutp8 ... oLIta?dl=0