Narrowing preamp search

abo · « **Reply #20 on:** 15 Dec 2003, 12:59 pm »

Carlman,

May I ask why aspen's GK-1 isn't on your list? According to Hugh, this must be a killer combination!
The reason I ask is that I am considering getting a GK-1. Unfortunately I don't have the opportunity to audition it before I buy. Therefore I would like to hear other people's opinions about choosing preamps in general and the GK-1 in particular.

Greetz Abo

Bill O'Connell · « **Reply #21 on:** 15 Dec 2003, 02:56 pm »

Hi Carlman,

You could go to Eastern Electric website at www.eeaudio.com click on reviews and find out what others are saying about the MiniMax
Regards
Bill

kristian85 · « **Reply #22 on:** 15 Dec 2003, 08:30 pm »

Qualifier--you'd have to find the Quad used for this price, which should be possible. Retail is $1K.

It's a stellar component- and easily meets your criteria, but with a whole host of features such as MM/MC phono preamp, Quad's unique, brilliant tone controls controllable via remote, balance, plenty of inputs, adjustable sensitivity, and deathly quiet. I've been around, heard it all, worked in the industry for many years, and so on, and find it to be nearly irreplacable for the tonecontrols alone.

They're not used too often, but when they're needed, such as with poor/old recordings or worn vinyl, they're a godsend.

See reviews at stereotimes.com and theabsolutesound.com, plus raves in every British mag that had its hands on it.

Carlman · « **Reply #23 on:** 15 Dec 2003, 08:42 pm »

Abo...
The GK-1 was my first choice but, costing approximately a thousand USD it was a good bit out of my range. I'm sure it's excellent but, I wanted something that cost less and that I could have operating within a month of purchase. Waiting 2 weeks for someone to send me a pre that I plug in and start listening immediately has its appeal... Buying a kit from Australia, even partially built by the master himself, would take me a lot of time and cost twice as much.... and probably sound better... but, money's money. I have no job so, my budget comes from the sale of other gear only. I found an abandoned kit a guy was selling but, it was a basic and I'd want a few more options... and completely unassembled it still cost a little more than the Dodd.

Bill...
Thanks for the link to the minimax.

Kristian, maybe it's the music I'm listening to but, I don't follow what you're saying. Care to clarify? The only 'Quads' I know are ESL type..

doug s. · « **Reply #24 on:** 16 Dec 2003, 02:26 pm »

Quote

...Kristian, maybe it's the music I'm listening to but, I don't follow what you're saying. Care to clarify? The only 'Quads' I know are ESL type..

http://www.iagamerica.com/quad/99pre.htm

doug s.

Carlman · « **Reply #25 on:** 16 Dec 2003, 02:44 pm »

Wow, the Quad certainly looks nice. At $1,k, with a phono, that's a good looking deal.... I wonder how it would compare to the Purist, Dodd, GK-1, Eastern Minimax, and others... If I get a new contract or some kind of job, that Quad may go on the short list. Thanks for the clarification.

-Carl

kristian85 · « **Reply #26 on:** 16 Dec 2003, 08:03 pm »

Yeah, it sure is a great piece. I can hear that other much more expensive pres have a bit more top-end brightness and a touch more transparency, but the Quad gets trhe midrange and tonal color so right it's really hard to find fault with the overall experience. And its features and useability is off the scale when compared with your other choices.

I'd stick it on your shortlist now--you should be able to finagle a deal on a new one, or get a mint used one for around $600 or so.

Best,

Kristian

Carlman · « **Reply #27 on:** 16 Dec 2003, 08:22 pm »

I can't put it on the shortlist now because my money's tied up in the Dodd. If I don't like the Dodd, I'll ask Gary for a refund, even though that's not his policy.

If I do like it, then I'll have to compare it as the opportunity arises. I'll be doing a lot of touring with the Dodd or having people over for the next few months so, hopefully I'll get a chance to isolate what my gear is doing and what is out there that best fits my goals. I haven't had a better pre than the Audible Illusions 2-d. Which sounded great to me for the most part...

From a useability standpoint, that's all relative. Having a remote is neat but, completely unnecessary for me. In fact, I'd almost prefer not to have it. To me having 1 volume knob will be a huge bonus that I'm looking forward to.... so, I'm nowhere in the ballpark of needing more options... especially not a 'tape out' or any of that jazz. Added features often mean added noise, complicated circuit paths, etc. I like the KISS method.

doug s. · « **Reply #28 on:** 16 Dec 2003, 08:30 pm »

c-man, i really doubt that you'll be returning the dodd pre... a few years back, when i was looking for a new pre, i was considering cary, a-i, rogue, melos... i was talking w/audio connection, an n.j. dealer that carrys all but the melos, as melos is not in biz anymore... (they used to be a melos dealer, tho...) anyway, i told 'em i was considering a used sha-gold-r, as well as the ones they carry. the guy told me flat-out not to bother w/the ones he carries, cuz the melos is so much better.

well, i ended up w/an ma333, after trying a cary slp-98 & a rogue magnum 99. i never tried an a-i, but the ma333 is certainly head & shoulders above the other two...

re: the quad, i yust showed ya the weblink, cuz the question came up, & i've seen (but not heard) that piece. i'm *not* recommending it - no tubes!

doug s.

Mad DOg · « **Reply #29 on:** 17 Dec 2003, 12:02 am »

C-man,

if you end up unsatisfied w/ the dodd, i'd recommend the Aragon Aurum solid state preamp...it's now discontinued but you can occasionally find them on A-gon for around $500-700 in like new condition...within your stated budget...

why the Aragon Aurum? well, i went from a Rogue Magnum 99 to the Aurum for many of the same reasons why sold your Audible Illusions. it was a bit too noisy (the hiss started to bother me) and i got tired of shopping for tubes. so how does the Aurum stack up to the Magnum 99 as far as sonics were concerned? here's what made the decision SO easy...the Aurum surpassed the Magnum 99 is almost every aspect.

highs were more detailed and transparent. there was more airiness.

mids weren't quite as liquid as the 99 but the most liquid and full i've experienced from a solid state preamp.

bass was much tighter and even stronger w/ the Aurum. bass impact, slam and dynamics were improved by a significant amount.

imaging was excellent w/ both preamps but blackness, focus and clarity were improved w/ the Aragon. also the hiss i heard w/ the magnum 99 was no longer there. to top it all off, the build quality is excellent. the volume knob is amazingly smooth, solid and stout.

for the price that you can get the Aurum on A-gon, i think it's a real steal! definitely one of the warmest sounding solid state preamps i've heard. it is the most dynamic preamp i've owned without a doubt. i think it's the best of both worlds; close to tube warmth in the mids without any of the tube drawbacks. highs aren't rolled off and bass isn't tubby as it is with many of the tube preamps.

just my $0.02...keep in mind that i'm running Aragon Palladium II monoblock amps too so there might be some positive synergy going on there as well.

doug s. · « **Reply #30 on:** 17 Dec 2003, 03:26 am »

m-dog, not to slight yer pre, (i had considered this exact one myself once-upon-a-time, before i went to tubes), but i am not at all surprised ya liked it better than the rogue. the rogue is the only pre i have tried in the past several years that i couldn't live with, for pretty-much the reasons ya mention. it was way noisy, way microphonic, wery coloured, & no bass to speak of. also not wery dynamic. the highs were ok, but nuttin' to write home about. the typical tube midrange *bloom* was so overdone, as to be annoying, imo... the only way this pre could work, would be w/a wery dry, overly detailed system, imo...

ymmv,

doug s.

Mad DOg · « **Reply #31 on:** 17 Dec 2003, 03:47 am »

Quote from: doug s.

m-dog, not to slight yer pre, (i had considered this exact one myself once-upon-a-time, before i went to tubes), but i am not at all surprised ya liked it better than the rogue. the rogue is the only pre i have tried in the past several years that i couldn't live with, for pretty-much the reasons ya mention. it was way noisy, way microphonic, wery coloured, & no bass to speak of. also not wery dynamic. the highs were ok, but nuttin' to write home about. the typical tube midrange *bloom* was so overdone, as to be annoying, imo... the only way this pre could work, would be w/a wery dry, overly detailed system, imo...

ymmv,

doug s.,

no slight taken since everyone's experiences will differ based on system synergy and preferences...

actually, i loved the rogue mag 99 prior to the aurum...in fact in my system, it was considerably better than the passive CIA, wright wla12a toob pre, another toob pre which was in the beta stage, simaudio celeste p-5003 ss pre, and adcom gfp-565 ss pre. better dynamics and musicality over all these in my system. in fact, i never had any issues with dynamics or bass delivery either. bass was quite good in my system. better than any other the other preamps. highs were better than the wright as well as the beta preamp. noise was on par w/ the simaudio celeste. i didn't experience the overdone midrange "bloom". in fact the mids from the wright pre was way more ripe and overdone. i've often heard that the rogue 99 magnum is rather dry for a toob pre and based on my experience, i would tend to agree with this when using stock toobs. overall, i found the rogue to be very enjoyable in my system. very good bass and no overdone mids. just a bit too noisy. i would've kept it if it weren't for the hiss...microphonics i could deal with since i don't go around kicking my pre when listening to music.

i'm thinking that the other problems you had w/ the rogue may have been synergy related...what were u using w/ the 99 when u had it?

doug s. · « **Reply #32 on:** 17 Dec 2003, 04:20 am »

Quote from: Mad DOg

... i'm thinking that the other problems you had w/ the rogue may have been synergy related...what were u using w/ the 99 when u had it?

i agree that synergy is key... my system is similar to what i'm using now, and is what i used after i replaced the 99 with 1st the cary & then the melos. i could have easily lived w/the cary - a really nice pre, imo - and, if i hadn't tried the melos, i'd likely still be using the cary.

i was using electrocompaniet aw60ftt's vertically bi-amped, driving my meret re monitors. my vmps larger subs were driven by a pair of unbridged original iteration adcom gfa555's, w/each amps' channel dedicated to one driver of these two-driver subs. presently, i use a mesa baron on my monitors (meret res' or proac ref-8-sigs), & a pair of electrocompaniet aw75dmb's on the subs.

i attribute my experience to an impedance mismatch. rogue sez the 99's output impedance is 150 ohms, which should be more than low enuff to drive my 6m interconnects feeding the 25k-ohm input impedance of my marchand x-over. but, my experience indicates the rogue 99's actual output impedance is likely somewhere around 2.5k-ohms. this was verified by crossing resistors over the amp's inputs to listen for wolume drop, per advice & help of dennis had, owner/designer of cary audio... it would explain the rogue's lack of dynamics, the only-ok treble & the m.i.a. bass that i experienced in my system... dennis was concerned that the particular slp-98 i was considering buying used, had a low-enuff output impedance for my rig. at 800 ohms, it was more than low enuff, & worked fine. (present iterations of the slp-98, btw, are ~600 ohms, & dennis can configure them for as low as ~250 ohms output impedance, on special order.)

doug s.