[I.Greyhound Fan]

I had a chance to review the new FET Valve CF preamp this past week.  Two weeks earlier I was able to hear the T-9 in my system.  I was also able to take home the prior version of the FET Valve preamp when it first became available.  I was very impressed with the CF.

My system consists of an Ultra Plus hybrid DAC with a pair of  RCA 6FQ7 Clear Top 2 plate tubes (without the center shield), Pass Labs X250 amp, Pass Labs X1 preamp and an Ultra Plus Hybrid preamp, Magnepan 1.6 speakers, Music Hall 25.2 CDP as a transport, Martin Logan sub, cables by BJC and Silnote.  For the review, I listened to the CF with and without the sub which I have crossed over at 45Hz with the speakers running full range.

When I first listened to the CF I immediately noticed the tube sound and warmth that was missing from the original FET.  The CF was not syrupy but had just the right amount of warmth without sacrificing or rolling off treble. The next thing that I noticed was how dynamic it sounded.  It's dynamics were on par with my Pass X1 preamp which sold for $6K.  Bass was deep, fast and controlled but not quite on par with the X1.  The preamp sounded musical, fast and had excellent pace and rhythm.  The sound stage was very wide and extended out to the walls of my 17x17' room.  The sound was very transparent but still retained a lush and liquid midrange.  In fact, the midrange was the best part of this preamp. I recently bought my X1 preamp as an upgrade from my Ultra Plus. The X1 is an excellent preamp and it is a step up from the Ultra but its midrange is a little too light and airy for my tastes, I guess I am a tube guy after all.  The CF's midrange had more weight and texture.  Vocals had more body to them.  I also noticed that cymbals had a little more air to them and sounded more natural. The level of detail and resolution was very good but this is where my X1 out performed the CF.  The X1 was more resolving and smoother sounding as it should be for more than 3 times the cost of the CF.

Now I know many of you want to know how the CF compares to the older FET.  When I had the FET in my system, I was using a Parasound Halo A21 amp and my Ultra plus preamp with 1950's Sylvania Black Plate tubes and my Ultra DAC with 1950's Raytheon black plates which gave my system a slightly warmer, darker, more dynamic and tube sound.  The FET was a very good sounding preamp and it was an improvement over my Ultra.  But it was a hybrid unit and it sounded like a hybrid and was missing the tube midrange and warmth that the CF has.  I feel that the CF has a wider sound stage, much greater transparency, better midrange and is more musical than the older FET.   

I was able to hear the T-9 in my system.  It is an upgrade over the T-8 but it is not on par with the CF.  The T-9 is very smooth sounding and has better air, resolution and detail than my Ultra Plus but it is not as musical and dynamic as the CF and my Ultra Plus.  Bass was not nearly as deep.  It has a more laid back presentation.   However, the friend that brought his T-9 over for me to hear, says that the T-9 had more bass in his system. 

Music Selections-

Chesky records Hybrid SACD's-

Worlds Greatest Audiophile Recordings
The Ultimate Demonstration disc

 
The Blue Coast Collection Various Artists
This is K2 HD sound Various Artists
Pat Metheny Whats It All About
Doug Macleod XRCD- Come To find
George Winston- Autumn 20th Annivesary Edition
Boxer Rebellion-The Cold Still
Fleetwood Mac- Rumors remastered version
Patricia Barber- Cafe Blue
Eva Cassidy-Imagine, Live at Blue's Alley
Tutti Orchestral Sampler Hybrid SACD
Steely Dan- Aja remastered version
Muddy Waters-Folk Singer Hybrid SACD
John Coltrane and Johnny Hartman

[ArthurDent]

Thanks for the review IGF, have been awaiting this comparison. Of course now I still have to decide what the budget will allow upgrade-wise when I send Frank my T-8. At least this helps with some first hand experience. I know mmmv. 

[martyo]

Thanks  Larry!

Sounds like a winner Frank.

[Kwebb]

Very, very, very, very good!!!

THANK YOU!

Kyle

[WGH]

Great review. How would you describe the qualities of the Pass Labs X250 amp in your system? I ask because I have the AVA Synergy 450 which already has a tube like character.

Wayne

[Art_Chicago]

to OP: thanks for the review!
my question is about bass in your system: is your sub an active one? also, how deep those maggies play without a sub?

[I.Greyhound Fan]

Art, My sub is active and I used it briefly during my review of the Preamps.  My 1.6's are supposed to go down to 45Hz, but in my room they go down a little lower.  The bass with my Maggies is fairly deep and powerful with good slam.  I run them full range and have my sub set so that you only know it is there on bass heavy music and even then it is fairly seamless.  In fact, I will turn it off for periods of time.  And now with my X250 I feel that for most music I don't need the sub.

WGH- the X250 is a neutral amp but it has great air and transparency, more so than the Synergy and FET amps.  It is a very liquid and smooth sounding amp.  The X250 is extremely dynamic with great bass control and slam. Its back ground is completely silent or black. It sounds great at  low volumes and does not lose its musicality or dynamics at lower volumes (the 600R has the same attributes).  The FET amps do some things better though, mainly treble and separation between instruments.  I would have bought a 600R but when I took one home it was a little on the bright side with my Maggies and Ultra preamp and DAC.  I think the 600R would  be fine in my system with the new FET CF preamp though.  The tweeters on Maggies can be fatiguing with the slightest hint of brightness and my room accentuates it as it is all windows and wood floors.

I love the X250 and it was a huge step up from my Parasound A21 in most respects.  The newer X250.5 is supposed to be more tube like.

[themadmilkman]

I was able to hear the T-9 in my system.  It is an upgrade over the T-8 but it is not on par with the CF.  The T-9 is very smooth sounding and has better air, resolution and detail than my Ultra Plus but it is not as musical and dynamic as the CF and my Ultra Plus.  Bass was not nearly as deep.  It has a more laid back presentation.   However, the friend that brought his T-9 over for me to hear, says that the T-9 had more bass in his system. 

It sounds like there may have been an impedance mismatch between the T-9 and your amp.

[I.Greyhound Fan]

It sounds like there may have been an impedance mismatch between the T-9 and your amp.

I don't think so, there were no volume issues and I am assuming that the CF is similar to the T-9 in that respect.  My friend brought over his N-Core monoblocks to try in my system.  My Ultra still was more dynamic and had much deeper bass.  The T-9 was more resolving and smoother though. The volume was fine but bass was just not as deep.  It was the same with the T-8 when I took one home a few years back to try with my Parasound  Amp.  I bought the Ultra instead because of the bass and how much more dynamic it was.  The Ultra has been upgraded to a Plus model with the Mosfet upgrades and 6CG7 tubes which made it even more musical and dynamic.

I like the T-9 but it is not a good fit with my gear and in my room.  I think if I had speakers that go down deeper than my Magnepans it would be a different story. I will be going over to my friends house tonight to listen to his gear with the T-9 and I will post my impressions.

Sorry to get off track here as this thread was originally about the CF and not the T-9.

[trackball02]

I.Greyhound, Have you ever auditioned the Avastar pre in your system. I'm wondering what improvements I'll hear if I replace it with the CF. Thanks.

[I.Greyhound Fan]

Here is an update on the T-9.  I was able to listen to the T-9 in a friends system for 3 hours last night.  His system consists of a pair of NCore monoblocks, Magnepan 1.7 speakers, an elaborate computer system for digital, hi-rez music and a Wyered For Sound DSD DAC.  His room is small with acoustic panels and is set up for Near Field listening.  I was impressed with the sound to say the least.  The T-9 had better dynamics and bass in his system. The T-9 has a nice smooth, detailed sound and leans to the warmer side but not as much as the CF.  However, when we swapped in my Ultra Plus Preamp, the sound stage became wider and deeper.  The sound was more musical and dynamic.  The Ultra however, had a brighter sound and was not nearly as tube sounding.  I preferred the general tone and harmonics of the T-9, its a great buy and a nice sounding preamp. 

By the way, the near field listening with the Magnepan 1.7's sounded great.  Who knew that Maggies would sound so good in that type of set up.

I.Greyhound, Have you ever auditioned the Avastar pre in your system. I'm wondering what improvements I'll hear if I replace it with the CF. Thanks.

I never had the chance to hear the Avastar in my system.

[mg8]

Great comparison - I got lucky, placed an order today prior to researching on A-C.  The characteristics that you describe are exactly my goals.  I did pick up a side story reference that you guys are tube-rolling the AVAhifi gear.  Interesting, I love tubes and have been all SS for 12 months.  It's good to be back on track

[Nocturne79]

Well having read our review I am convinced and sent in my preamp for a cf upgrade...excited to get it back.  thanks for the review