Maybe vintage preamps are NOT the way....

My Fisher crapped out on me....bad cap somewhere...and I've got a new system in place tonight:

Conrad-Johnson PV-2 preamplifier
Sargent-Rayment SR-5100 EL 34 power amplifier
Tannoy Monitor Gold 12" speakers
Music Hall CD-25 HDCD player
Tributaries 12 speaker cable
Spurious Audio Mk II interconnects

I could go on for several paragraphs about the differences between these two systems, however I will just say what is important and that is that the elimination of the tone control circuitry is a revelation. The level of transparency in this system has improved ten-fold. If this is what can be achieved matching a vintage power amp with a modern preamp, then I'm all ears. It's too early to vouch for the quality of either the preamp or power-amp I'm using tonight, but the increase in realism and clarity is more than obvious. I've been told by many that this would happen, but I didn't want to believe that the tone controls were having such a dramatic effect on the overall picture. The only downside to all of this is that now more than ever....I am at the mercy of the software.

 

I think that the difference between the Fisher and the Conrad-Johnson is a little more than the elimination of tne controls...

 

Right, I agree. The Fisher was designed by a genius whose primary motive was achieving the finest and most sophistacated sound possible with the highest quality materials available.

The Conrad-Johnson was designed by two (hearing-impaired?) economists with no other motive than making a tubey, colored, top-heavy preamp as cheaply as possible for maximum profit.

 

Thats why I am a McIntosh guy!

Seriously, my McIntosh C33 is the most amazing thing that I have ever heard!!

 

While I'd bet you are being facetious here, the truth of the matter is that early c-j equipment definitely did sound tubey, colored and a little plump in the bottom. I can't speak from experience on any of their later products, but I threw in the towel after trying to get the earlier Premiere pieces to sound neutral and ultimately transparent; haven't owned any of their stuff since the mid-eighties as a result.

 

Well, this piece is circa 1980....but I've not heard recent CJ pieces that impressed me anymore. This one is not horrible by any means. It has some really nice qualities and it's quite transparent all things considered, but they're not fooling me. I know what they're trying to do with this stuff and it's a cheap trick. I've heard it 1,000 times.

I also don't get this "newer is better" attitude that many audiophiles have. To the contrary, I think....with notable exceptions, of course......that current trends in speaker and amplifier design are starting to sound worse and worse. As if designers in the '80s couldn't hear as well as we can today or something.

What I'm hearing in this simple circuit is something that has nothing to do with any particular piece of gear. It's sort of like when I listened to the Goodmans 201s in my system. Hearing a speaker without a crossover was incredible, but that didn't mean that I could live with that speaker. I'll now be looking towards newer audiophile tube preamps with more simple design than the early stuff with all the tone controls, ash trays, and windshield wipers. The other nice thing about '80s audiophile stuff is that it's inexpensive and they all have phono stages. Now I just have to come up with a list of preamps other than CJ that have gorgeous gold faceplates and start trying them out.

I am still convinced that vintage power amps cannot be beat. I also remain convinced to date that Tannoy makes the best drivers in the world. I've not yet been able to find anything that will do what these speakers do.

 

Prix, Sckott told me this would happen... I had a Dyna PAS-3 that burned on me, and I substituted it with a Foreplay... the Foreplay has the same sweet tone, but with better dynamics, top end extension and definition.

And the FP was cheaper, too!

 

Well, Sckott is right about the PAS-3. Every Dynakit preamp I've heard has been woefully unimpressive. Their power amps, on the other hand.....I listened to a stock ST-70 w/ Mullard EL 34s through a pair of Tannoy Berkeleys for about an hour recently and the sound was absolutely lovely.

 

Yeah, I made a lot of nice decisions by luck. The luckiest was the Foreplay. I kinda left it stock but made better cap choices outside of Bottlehead and spent maybe $12 more. Simple pre and beats the pants out of most anything I've tried. Tubes are plentiful and very dependable. Nice thing is, you can build it into a Hammond box (like I did) or do something home-depot-ish and geeky. Sound is great, but it's DEPENDABLE and inexpensive.

 

Got a link?

 

Hey....I found their website and there's a bunch of naked chicks on it!

 

Prix,

Van Alstine Transcendence Seven SLR

You might like it allot. Its very simple, uses a patented FetValve (tube/MOSFET) design by Frank Van Alstine. It uses two 12AT7’s in the line stage and two 12AX7’s for the phono stage. The headphone section uses the line stage section.

Its VERY transparent, has an enormous soundstage and the phono section is way better then it has right to be.

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/amp/messages/20536.html

I bought one recently. It isn’t my first and it won’t be my last preamp but I am certainly enjoying it right now.
Mine has the Full-Monte upgrades - RIAA phono, tape and power supply.

 

http://www.atma-sphere.com/products/index.html


I'm not even going to try to convince you to consider the Atma-Sphere gear. Call and talk with Ralph or Bill and let them explain it.

 

I took the preamp out of my system and am using a line level volume control. Made a world of difference. My system has disappeared, I only hear the music.

 

So what were you hearing before? Static?

There are some very important things preamps provide an amp. Stable impedance and current. If your preamp is poor and robbing your system of sound then removing it can certainly help. I DO understand, my amp has an Alps volume control and a separate input for it as well as a bypassed input. However, the addition of a GOOD preamp is act8ually more beneficial then a line pot. Some designers have worked out ‘buffered’ line stages that are very transparent and have controlled impedance but they are few and far between and again, under the scrutiny of others to their real world advantage.

In the end you’re better off with a good quality preamp.

 

No static. I was just not getting the midrange I wanted. Going strait from the sacd player to the amp via the passive volume control gave me what I was looking for. The sacd is my only source. If I were using a turntable, of course, I would need something else.

 

Disagree. If the impedance matching is correct between source and amp, a passive preamp can produce a superb sounding system. Ask mikel.

 

Hehe, I was joking about the static

 

The owner's wife, I believe.

I've built a heavily modded Foreplay and the recent S.E.X. SET amp. Very impressive products for the price, if you've got the urge to build something yourself.

John K.

 

I tried both passive and active and I agree with Steve.

 

Guys....thank you for your recommendations for newer preamps. Please keep in mind, though, that I have a few criteria that I follow when I purchase personal gear that is not for resale:

A) I am a cheap mo-fo. I will rarely spend more than $500 on any piece of gear.
B) I almost never buy new.
C) I absolutely MUST have a phono stage.
D) I absolutely MUST have a gold faceplate. Gold faceplates make everything sound better.