Luxman CL-38u SE and MQ-88u SE preamp and amp

Does anyone here have any experience with the Luxman CL-38u SE preamp and MQ-88u SE amp? Would love to hear your opinions. Especially how good is the phono stage on the CL-38s SE.

 

Sigh...

 

I bought the CL38U-SE about 7 months ago and it the best preamp I have ever owned. Only 100 of the SE's were built so It's hard to find anybody who has used one. This preamp is not warm and fuzzy. Unlike my CJ ET-3SE which I sold the sound is smooth but very Dynamic. Your not going to get rolled of highs w/this preamp. As far as the phono is concerned it's one of the best features of the preamp. It uses 4 step up transformers. 2for MC High and 2 for MC Low carts. Records are dead quiet and therein plenty of detail in the music. I do not use the MQ-88U-SE amp but my local dealer has hooked it up in the demo room. The amp has powered a pair of Klipsch La Scalla's. Very impressive. He also had the Luxman TT in the system. I know Art Dudley of Stereophile has relied both these items over the past year and he compares them very favorably w/his much more expensive Shindo gear. My current setup has a Bryston 2.5 SST2 amp, Aerial 5T's, Linn TT w/a Lingo 3, Bluesound Node and a RME ADI 2-DAC.

 

Interesting that you mention that it's not warm and fuzzy. I was expecting it would be on the warmer side of neutral, as Dudley this say it compares very favorably to his (at the time) Shindo Masseto preamp, which is on the warm side of neutral. In the latest Stereophile, he reviewed the MQ-88u SE and also said it is on par, though with some differences, with his Shindo Haut Brion amp. I love the Shindo sound, but not the Shindo prices and was hoping that this was a great alternative.

I did love my previous KT-88 based Line Magnetic integrated amp (216IA). I'm just curious how this combo would stack up against my current Line Magnetic 518IA SET integrated as well as the included phonostage vs. my Acoustic Plan Phonomaster SE. What would I gain and what would I lose? There doesn't seem to be anywhere in NYC where I can hear the Luxman.

 

Well I was comparing it to a CJ ET-3 SE which just lacked the top end dynamics. In my opinion it rolled off the top too much. My description of the CL 38 U Se would be smooth and neutral. Luxman has really stepped up it's game over the last few years. I had gone to another dealer and compared this preamp to a 10K VAC preamp and the Luxman IMHO was better. Luxman is coming out w/the CL38 U-C. Same preamp but w/a set of balanced outputs. Don't know the price but it should be on the market soon.

 

I know the difference in the MQ-88u SE and MQ-88u C is the oil capacitors in the former vs. film caps in the latter (and how do you set the output impedance when there is only one set of outputs?). Other than the balanced outputs on the CL-38u C, what are the other differences in the SE model?

 

I think the tubes too. The SE uses the JJ ECC 802S for the preamp and the ECC 803S for the phono. The new pre amp uses the cheaper JJ tubes.

 

Anyone else here have any experience with the Luxman CL-38u preamp?

 

Subscribed to see if you end up listening to this combo, but I'd be shocked if it were better than the Phonomaster/518i combo.

 

Seeing this a bit late. I have the luxman and find the phonostage and overall sound to be excellent. I also like the convenience of the remote and toggle switche for mono. I have it connected into a older Mcintosh solid state which may be limiting it slightly. The Lux as a pre-amp for the 518ia might be an interesting pairing?

 

I just added the Luxman PD-171 A TT to my CL38U SE. Love the combination.

 

Hi all,
as a newcomer on this forum i just noticed this thread. I have played with lots of different gear (both tube and solid state) over the years now, but i have found my ease of mind and heart in the Luxman CL-38uC and MQ-88uC combo. I decided to go for the Luxman to replace my beloved but vulnerable Graaf amps after extensive research including Luxman solid state amps and other brands like Accuphase. Compared to the earlier limited SE versions the tubes are indeed the simpler ECC83S and ECC82 versions and the paper-in oil caps are replaced by film caps. As far as i know the used KT88's are the same. All tubes are new production by JJ. Another difference between the C and SE version is the newer pre amp also has a balanced line input. In my setup with a Benz Micro Wood S Medium cartridge the pre amp performs absolutely fantastic and is dead silent. A great soundstage, a real 3-D holographic projection. It's just like the old B&W slogan 'listen and you'll see' is coming to life. The power amp, driving 6 ohm Diapason Adamantes III, does it's job with great authority and ease. Smooth highs, deep and controlled bass and an all natural feeling. After extensive testing with different interconnects my DAC performs consistently best on the balanced input of the pre amp. This setup can be listened to for hours and hours without any fatigue. I looks stunning too, it is built beautifully and it has a great little remote control. So what can i wish for... maybe later on some tube rolling?
Best regards.

 

Congrats on the CL38uC. It's a great preamp. I have the SE version. I've had it for over 1 and 1/2 years. Just as quiet as the day I bought it. Have you tried the phono stage? I sold my outboard phono as the internal phono is very good. Hasn't been much conversation on the SE being only 100 were made for worldwide distribution. Hopefully more will discover the new version. I don't have the amp but heard it many time at my dealer. He usually had it hooked up to a pair of LaScalla's w/the Luxman PD-171A TT. Fantastic modern retro setup. Plenty of conversation on solid state Luxman's. But very little on the tube side which is a shame as their tube products can stand up to many of the competitors out there.

 

My main source is vinyl, so i use the MC phono input most of the time (with the Benz Micro Wood cart mounted on a Transrotor turntable). I play a medium output version of this cartridge, but this pre amp is so quiet a low output will perform great as well. The MM input is tested with an Audio Technica cart mounted on a Thorens and is very very good also.
Over the years i have played with many different phono stages, but after all i prefer an all-tube setup or a setup like the Luxman using tubes and a step up transformer. The way Luxman created a perfect combination at this price-performance level is impressive and a real joy.

 

Hi, just joined the group.
I have both (se version) and I love the combo.
Speakers are Devore Super 9.
A MQ-300 just joined the system and it’s also a great amp.
Please ask if you have any questions.

 

Has anyone rolled tubes in the C38u? I'm especially interested in the phone stage

 

Nice amp - I bet that MQ-300 is a peach. Lots of quality iron, including Finemet chokes, parallel drivers, twin tube rectification. Done properly and not just jewellery, it seems. It could probably do with some horns on the end of it, or some field-coil exotica, no?

 

I am not sure I've heard anyone make direct comparisons between the sound profiles of the MQ88-uSE and the MQ-300. Do you have any listening observations you could share?

 

I don't own the C38u but I rolled the preamp tubes in the MQ-88uC and it was very beneficial. I don't have any specific recs but any NOS tube is probably better then any JJ.

 

Sorry for the late reply. The MQ88-uSE is a bit more dynamic. I like them both to be honest but I kept the 300.

 

No doubt.

 

Reviving this thread as I just acquired a new CL38uSE (I was surprised to find a new SE still available). It's replacing a Xindak SA3200s. I'll be getting a new tube power amp in a few days as well, but I'm glad to have a chance to get a sense of the Luxman's sound first through my current Dared monoblocks.

This is a pretty substantial upgrade in terms of cost, reputation, and features, so my expectations were pretty high. My initial impressions so far are very good, though with a few caveats. The Xindak is a tube/SS hybrid, and I've enjoyed its somewhat lush and forgiving sound for the past decade or so. It came with the entire system I bought from a fellow (former) forum member. A few years ago, when it was out for repairs, a local shop loaned me a far more expensive Bryston SS preamp, yet I was actually very happy to get the Xindak back into the system, as it seemed to have more warmth and richness, especially with voices, even though the Bryston was more extended and precise. However, the Xindak creates some pretty substantial hum, and its remote control stopped working, so I thought it was time to try something new, hopefully with some of the Bryston's precision combined with some tube midrange magic. The Luxman seemed to check off a lot of boxes.

Since setting it up last night, I've been doing a lot of listening (CD last night, vinyl today). I was initially disappointed, as I made the mistake of listening to it before it was properly warmed up, even though Art Dudley warned in his Stereophile review that it requires at least 20 minutes to sound OK and an hour to sound its best. I was surprised at just how right he was, as I've never noticed much change after powering on the Xindak. Initially, the Luxman sounded shrill and cheap. But after an hour, it sounded very nice indeed. Without question, like my memory of that Bryston preamp, it has more bass precision and impact than the Xindak (and probably even more than the Bryston, but it's been too many years since I heard the latter to make a confident assertion on that score). It definitely has more treble extension, and less midrange presence than the Xindak. As Luxmanc138 stated above, the amp is not warm and fuzzy, which at first was a little jarring to me.

But once warned up, I was kind of addicted to trying out different CDs to explore its sonic character. Getting used to its very different sound, I started enjoying its holographic imaging, its impressive bass impact, and sparkling piano tones in particular. I feel like I can listen more deeply into the soundstage, and while it is a little "colder" in feel than the Xindak, it doesn't feel as sterile as I remember the Bryston sounding. So I think on balance, it is indeed a significant sonic upgrade for me.

Much of today's listening was focused on comparing its internal phonostage to my outboard Dynavector P-75 mkII. I honestly had no idea what to expect with this comparison, as reviewers tend to write that the Luxman competes with or bests outboard phono stages up to $1,000 or so, and I believe the Dynavector costs just a little less than that (and I bought it mainly because it's supposed to have such great synergy with my Dynavector 20x2 cartridge). It turns out I'll be keeping the Dynavector--in a direct comparison, the Luxman MC stage added a lot of wonderfully palpable, almost "chunky" bass, but also a harsh treble glare on voices across the board that I didn't enjoy. Surprisingly, the solid state Dynavector seems to have fantastic synergy with the Luxman preamp, sounding extraordinarily refined in the midrange, perhaps not with the same "bloom" I would get with the Xindak, but with a more natural sense of an actual human voice in my living room. So based on my listening so far, I'm getting the best results from the Luxman-Dynavector vinyl playback, followed by CD playback (from a Rega Planet), with the Luxman onboard phonostage vinyl playback coming in last (its bass emphasis was kind of fun, but it came at the expense of scooping out the mids and adding treble harshness). I wonder, though, whether the 12AX7 tubes in the phonostage might need more break-in to sound their best.

I haven't played too much with the tone controls yet, as I'm still trying to get a feel for the preamp's overall sonic characteristics. But one thing I find very disappointing is the remote control: I don't mind that it's limited to volume and mute functions, but I very much mind how close to perpendicular to the machine's face you have to be to get it to work (the instruction booklet says it can be no more than 30 degrees in either direction from perpendicular, and that seems to be accurate). Because of the angle of my rack to where I sit (the rack is the far left corner of the room, aligned with the side wall), there's no way I can use it without getting up and walking around my coffee table to aim it (which has never been the case with any other remote control unit I've used). And then, each touch of the volume button increases or decreases the volume by such a large amount that it's practically useless, as I always end up walking over to the machine to make more fine adjustments. I'm kid of picky about getting the volume just right (and would like to be able to raise it temporarily for upright bass solos, for example), so this is a bigger frustration to me than it might be for most people.

That said, the sound is impressing me enough that I can't wait for my next listening session!

 

Sounds like you might be having a loading issue with the MC cartridge. I’ve never found any evidence of glare or hardness to the sound but I’m playing through Harbeths so that may all balance out. Congrats.

 

Yeah, I'm wondering whether I should have tried the "MC high" setting. I just assumed that since my cartridge is classified as low output ("low" is even printed on it, to distinguish it from its high-output MC brother), I should use the "MC low" setting. But I noticed it was considerably louder than with the Dynavector phonostage, so maybe there's some kind of mismatch.

.