-
Yes, the X1 is a little thin in the midrange. That Atma Sphere preamp looks like a great deal and it is enticing. I have looked a an MP-3 pre before. But it has no remote which is a deal breaker because I an too lazy to get up and change the volume after a long day at work. It also has only one pair of outputs and no sub out.
I am going to go over to my local Mac dealer later today and give a listen to some of their preamps to help me decide on the C2200.
-
Sounds good. You know, the right cable could do it for you. A nice reference cable, one that is above a hi fi-ish sounding cable....more a reference cable that has lots of texture and refined, strong in the mids could give you texture that is missing. In some cases its not that the gear doesnt have it, but the cable is not good enough to pass it.
-
1 Attachment(s)
BR, try to audition the BAT vk-42se pre. It's an outstanding piece, even though it is solid state. It absolutely changed my perspective on ss preamps. My A21 Attachment 9597 sounds unrecognizable. In a word it's terrific.
That CJ pre you mentioned is pretty average, imo.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluetrain
BR, try to audition the BAT vk-42se pre. It's an outstanding piece, even though it is solid state. It absolutely changed my perspective on ss preamps. My A21 Attachment 9597 sounds unrecognizable. In a word it's terrific.
That CJ pre you mentioned is pretty average, imo.
If I go with a BAT it will be tubed. Probably a VK-51se. I just listened to an ARC LS 27, an Atma-Spere MP3 and a Mac C220 all on an Ayre power amp Ayre evolution CD player Magnepan 3.7i's and 1.7's. The Mac sounded hifi while the other 2 were audiophile. The ARC was dark and tubey sounding but with great detail, air and transparency. The MP3 was the best sounding, it had more of a neutral tone almost SS but with tube warmth and a more full, textured midrange. Highs were probably a little rolled of as I brought a sibilant sounding CD and the MP-3 tamed it but on other passages the treble did not seem rolled or recessed. The Mac tamed it as well with use of the tone controls (i wish all gear had them as I could not tell the difference when the tone controls were defeated). The ARC did not help the Sibilant sound at all.
The MP3 is high on my list but the freaking remote control option is $950. It has only 1 set of speaker outputs but you can add a second set for $75. Also the volume control is stepped and clunky. But the sound was truly amazing. The best preamp that I have heard. It actually sounded some what similar to my Pass X1 but with a more textured and lush midrange.
Tomorrow I am going back to my local shop and I am going to bring my preamp and DAC to compare to the MP3.
By the way, I was surprized at the dark tubey sound of the ARC. Most people say just the opposite about ARC gear. I could live with the ARC but it was out classed by the lower priced Atma Sphere.
If any one is interested the 3.7i's sounded great. They have a slightly warmer darker sound than the 1.7's with more detail and a much smoother sound.
-
Raven...that's good news! The ARC may have had darker sounding tubes. They usually have a more lively open sound.
So the MAc was hifi sounding? When was production of tha amp? Man tha Atmasphere would be a great statement piece of gear! I hope it works out for you....man I don't think I could ever live with a SS amp again. I mean Last time I was at Peabodys house, his system was sounding amazing....but man you gotta have that tube texture.
Atma-Sphere music systems, inc.
-
Frenchmon, the ARC had stock tubes. I have to say that I was not impressed with the Ayre power amp. It did not have the musicality or bass slam of my Pass.
The amp was an $8000 VX-5 and it was way out classed by the Pass in every way.
Ayre Acoustics VX-5
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
Raven...that's good news! The ARC may have had darker sounding tubes. They usually have a more lively open sound.
So the MAc was hifi sounding? When was production of tha amp? Man tha Atmasphere would be a great statement piece of gear! I hope it works out for you....man I don't think I could ever live with a SS amp again. I mean Last time I was at Peabodys house, his system was sounding amazing....but man you gotta have that tube texture.
Atma-Sphere music systems, inc.
Frenchy Mr. P's amp is SS or isn't that what you meant. You said you don't think you could live with SS amp and then you said his system sounded amazing.
I'm not familiar with Atma-Sphere but $950 for a remote is insane.
-
Bluetrain, you found the CJ ET-3se ordinary? In what way? Every review and person that I have corresponded with feel that it is an outstanding preamp. What don't you like about it?
Thanks,
Larry
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackraven
Frenchmon, the ARC had stock tubes. I have to say that I was not impressed with the Ayre power amp. It did not have the musicality or bass slam of my Pass.
The amp was an $8000 VX-5 and it was way out classed by the Pass in every way.
Ayre Acoustics VX-5
I am interest by your impression of Ayre VX-5 since Ayre would be one of very few brands I would ever consider next to Pass Labs. Your impression make me more content with my X150.5.
I was also interest in you preamp comparison. Since I value air & transparency higher above "texture" the ARC LS27 might be my choice of those you auditioned. I have an LS9 which, of course, is solid state: if I were disposed to go for a tube pre I might consider an LS16 or LS17 since the the '27 would be 'way out of my range.
Regarding the original topic I wouldn't mind hearing the MAC but there are probably better sounding preamps for money -- though the C220 has tone controls, phono, and balance outputs. I'd probably be happiest, though, with a Pass Labs for that kind of money, though I'm I kind spring that at the this time. BTW, though it has balanced outputs, the MAC isn't a "fully differential" design.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack in Wilmington
Frenchy Mr. P's amp is SS or isn't that what you meant. You said you don't think you could live with SS amp and then you said his system sounded amazing.
I'm not familiar with Atma-Sphere but $950 for a remote is insane.
Hi Jack!
Yes Peabodys system was clicking and sounding great, but in my opinion....the tube texture in the mids is missing and just the overall tube presence and all that comes with that are not heard.. I mean don't get me wrong, its a out standing amp and high end to the max, and refined of a sound as can be....transparent, and very well balance from top to bottom....but there's no overall tube presence. So its more of a personal thing...a preference thing.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackraven
Bluetrain, you found the CJ ET-3se ordinary? In what way? Every review and person that I have corresponded with feel that it is an outstanding preamp. What don't you like about it?
Thanks,
Larry
I think Peabody had the CJ CT5 and it was a nice preamp...I though it was to syrupy, but I also think a change of tubes would have taken much of that away. But I don't find that preamp ordinary in the least.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
I am interest by your impression of Ayre VX-5 since Ayre would be one of very few brands I would ever consider next to Pass Labs. Your impression make me more content with my X150.5.
I was also interest in you preamp comparison. Since I value air & transparency higher above "texture" the ARC LS27 might be my choice of those you auditioned. I have an LS9 which, of course, is solid state: if I were disposed to go for a tube pre I might consider an LS16 or LS17 since the the '27 would be 'way out of my range.
Regarding the original topic I wouldn't mind hearing the MAC but there are probably better sounding preamps for money -- though the C220 has tone controls, phono, and balance outputs. I'd probably be happiest, though, with a Pass Labs for that kind of money, though I'm I kind spring that at the this time. BTW, though it has balanced outputs, the MAC isn't a "fully differential" design.
Feanor..a buddy of mine here in St. Louis has the LS16 and LS17 and both have lots of air & transparency!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
Feanor..a buddy of mine here in St. Louis has the LS16 and LS17 and both have lots of air & transparency!
Regarding these two, it's good to know other people's experience. If I'd had the cash I'd got one of those instead of the LS9 but they were both over twice what I paid for it.
-
I would like to know how the ARC LS 26 compares to the LS 27. You see the 26 on audiogon frequently. I still would also like to hear a BAT. While I would love to have the MP-3, the extra $950 for a remote is probably a deal breaker for me. Also the stepped volume control does not allow for fine volume control. I talked to the guys at Atma Sphere and it took them 2 years of R&D to develop the motorized control which is just now being offered as an option.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
Hi Jack!
Yes Peabodys system was clicking and sounding great, but in my opinion....the tube texture in the mids is missing and just the overall tube presence and all that comes with that are not heard.. I mean don't get me wrong, its a out standing amp and high end to the max, and refined of a sound as can be....transparent, and very well balance from top to bottom....but there's no overall tube presence. So its more of a personal thing...a preference thing.
I thought that was where you were going with your comment and didn't want anyone to misread you. I'd like to see Peabody bring home an LS27 or even a Ref 5SE and see how he likes it.
-
Frenchmon,
the CJ ET-3se is a departure from the warm and syrupy sound. It is a hybrid unit, basically a SS with a tube buffer with a single 6922 tube. The teflon caps are what really sets this preamp apart. Even the MP-3 that I am looking at has the Teflon cap upgrades for much better sound quality. Unfortunately they need 500hrs of burn in.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackraven
Bluetrain, you found the CJ ET-3se ordinary? In what way? Every review and person that I have corresponded with feel that it is an outstanding preamp. What don't you like about it?
Thanks,
Larry
A few months ago when I was in the market for a new pre for my vk-55se, a friend of mine brought to my place his ET-3se. We did compare it to my pv15, and to be honest, we both didn't find the expected improvement, except for it had more extended highs. The mids were less ear-pleasing, and the bass was about the same. So, to me it wasn't an upgrade for sure. If I ship the pv15 to CJ factory for the teflon cap upgrade, it will sounds better and will be cheaper than ET-3se.
Keep in mind that it is just an opinion based on my listening preferences.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackraven
I would like to know how the ARC LS 26 compares to the LS 27. You see the 26 on audiogon frequently. I still would also like to hear a BAT. While I would love to have the MP-3, the extra $950 for a remote is probably a deal breaker for me. Also the stepped volume control does not allow for fine volume control. I talked to the guys at Atma Sphere and it took them 2 years of R&D to develop the motorized control which is just now being offered as an option.
Not having a volume control would put any preamp ABSOLUTELY out of consideration for me. As far as I can see "2 years of R&D" to develop a motorized remote is either bull**** or bull****, (even if they mean elapsed time, not man-years). Frank Val Astine's price of $300 is more than enough for remote control, (though Frank should make r/c standard).
Stepped volume control is OK provided there are enough steps. My previous Bel Canto eVo2i and Sonic Frontiers Line 1 were stepped and now my LS9 is too: all are adequately fine. There are various kinds of stepped controls. Pretty much all are resistor arrays, some controlled by a logic chip (with some having an opamp in circuit, others not), others employ motorized "manual" selectors. The former usually have miniaturized, integrated circuit resistors make many steps practical. Mostly the latter employ discrete resistors thus tending to reduce the number of steps possible, though, some would say, make higher quality possible.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackraven
I would like to know how the ARC LS 26 compares to the LS 27. You see the 26 on audiogon frequently. I still would also like to hear a BAT. While I would love to have the MP-3, the extra $950 for a remote is probably a deal breaker for me. Also the stepped volume control does not allow for fine volume control. I talked to the guys at Atma Sphere and it took them 2 years of R&D to develop the motorized control which is just now being offered as an option.
Can you add a universal remote?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack in Wilmington
I thought that was where you were going with your comment and didn't want anyone to misread you. I'd like to see Peabody bring home an LS27 or even a Ref 5SE and see how he likes it.
Jack...you ever used your x-719 with the Pass Labs?
-
The MP-3's volume control is not digital, it is a ladder type and it need a motor installed and it takes up 12-15hrs to install the motor so you can't use a universal remote. Apparently it took a while because they did not want any interference with the sound. The stepped control has large steps and it works well but you can't get fine control. When you turn the volume knob, it goes "thunk" into the next step (it does not make any noise but you feel the thunk).
The Van Alstine remote use to be a $200 option but it has gone up in price. It is also motorized and makes the knob turn. The remote control unit is basic and only does volume and mute. A little pricey at $300.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
Jack...you ever used your x-719 with the Pass Labs?
Wow. That never even entered my mind. Next week I'll do that and pretend like I'm auditioning at my hifi shop. Thanks Frenchy
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackraven
The MP-3's volume control is not digital, it is a ladder type and it need a motor installed and it takes up 12-15hrs to install the motor so you can't use a universal remote. Apparently it took a while because they did not want any interference with the sound. The stepped control has large steps and it works well but you can't get fine control. When you turn the volume knob, it goes "thunk" into the next step (it does not make any noise but you feel the thunk).
The Van Alstine remote use to be a $200 option but it has gone up in price. It is also motorized and makes the knob turn. The remote control unit is basic and only does volume and mute. A little pricey at $300.
The MP-3's volume control is of the latter type I described, i.e. using discrete resistors. The new Ayre AX-5 has very similar design according to the Stereophile review, HERE. Of course the designs can extremely good but so can potentiometer, (such as AVA), or so-called digital designs.
"Ladder type" is a topology and can be implemented in what you refer to as "digital" in which case the digital only applies to the switching logic which, in turn, is no different than, for example, remote input selection. The difference is whether one considers discrete resistor to be potentially better than printed circuit resistors; certainly the former are more expensive, especially taking hand-fabrication in to consideration.
-
Bluetrain, I see you have a Parasound Halo A21 there. How do you like it? I have one. I replaced it with my Pass X250 and gave the A21 to my son to use for now. I love the attack of the A21, it is much better than my Pass in that respect. The leading edge of guitar and piano is much more real, where the Pass smooths that over and many smooth or liquid sounding amps do. I miss that in the Pass and it is my only real complaint about the X250. The Ayre VX-5 that I listened to had the same problem.
-
Feanor, if you get a chance, go listen to the new 3.7i's. They sound awesome. I would love to have a pair in my system.
|