Moscode 401HR

tvad4 · « **on:** 21 Jun 2006, 07:46 pm »

I recently took delivery of a Moscode 401HR for a two week trial. I also took delivery of a Dussun V8i for a four week trial. Two very good, and different amplifiers. Later, I'll post some impressions in the Dussun thread.

I don't want to go into very much detail about the Moscode at this point because it's very early in the process, but the advantages of tube rolling in the 401HR are immediately apparent.

The Moscode uses two pairs of tubes. Each position can use a number of tube variants including 6DJ8 and 12AU7 (and many others). One of the positions has more effect on the sound than the other, according to George Kaye. I have heard more changes in the sound of rolling just three sets of tubes into one position on the Moscode than I have ever heard rolling various 6SN7 and KT88/6550 tubes my VAC tube amp. Score one point for the Moscode in the category of tube rolling.

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #1 on:** 22 Jun 2006, 03:05 am »

A little history....thought this might interest you....a few older Moscode models on Audiogon....

.... http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?ampstube&1154743242 ....[/list:u]

.... http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?ampstube&1155279519 ....[/list:u]

Chris[/list:u]

tvad4 · « **Reply #2 on:** 27 Jun 2006, 04:06 pm »

I'm in the seventh day of a 15 day in-home audition. George Kaye told me that amp would require 100 hours to open up to 90% of its potential. Thus far, it has just over 150 hours.

It is a very musical amp. Nice extension without edge or glare. The image is wide and solid. Bass goes nice and deep with good control, although not as crisp and slammin' as some purely SS amps or digital amps I have tried. In my room, the bass is more true to the music, and provides an excellent and balanced foundation without sounding out of balance with the rest of the frequency spectrum. In fact, the 401HR's bass is better than that from any tube amp I have heard at home.

The midrange and treble is silky like a good tube amp. It's not quite as holographic and magical as the midrange on my VAC Phi 110/110, but it's still very early in the burn-in process, and this area could very well improve. The VAC didn't develop its magic until hundreds of hours into the burn-in process.

What is terrfic about the Moscode is how easily the sound can be tailored with tube rolling. The changes I get rolling tubes in the 401HR are more immediate than any changes I have realized by rolling KT88 or 6SN7 tubes in the VAC (to the credit of the VAC). The stock Electro Harmonix and Sovtek tubes are quite capable, but rolling in some NOS 12AU7 or 6922 tubes makes a clear change for the better as the highs become sweeter and the image becomes more 3D. I have rolled Siemens E88CC, Mullard ECC82, Tungsram 12AU7, National 6DJ8 and RCA 5814A. The 12AU&/5814A present a slightly softer and larger image. Very, very nice. The 6DJ8/6922 create a punchier sound with a more coherent image, IMO, and they better define the edges of the instruments.

Yes, I would say the Moscode combines the best of both worlds, but it favors the best qualities of tube amps. I imagine someone walking into a room who was not familiar with the Moscode, and without seeing the amp, would guess the amplification was 100% tubes.

A very nice amplifier. I am absolutely enjoying my time with it.

MGDeWulf · « **Reply #3 on:** 3 Jul 2006, 01:31 am »

I'm using Sovtek 6N1P on the inner set of tubes and tesla ECC88 on the outer set of tubes. The 6DJ8 varients offer a fuller and slightly more dimensional sound than the 6FQ7 (6CG7) options. However, using the supplied EH 6CG7 on the inside and the Sovtek 6N1P on the outside offered some pretty spectacular results. I am not a fan of the Sovtek 6H30P. It just doesn't cut it for me in the Moscode or any other amp that I've heard it in.

Thanks for the comments on a really good amp. And, BTW, break-in is very important with the Moscode. Turn it on when you first get up in the morning each day, it will improve greatly.

Marty

tvad4 · « **Reply #4 on:** 3 Jul 2006, 01:50 am »

Quote from: MGDeWulf on 3 Jul 2006, 01:31 am

I'm using Sovtek 6N1P on the inner set of tubes and tesla ECC88 on the outer set of tubes. The 6DJ8 varients offer a fuller and slightly more dimensional sound than the 6FQ7 (6CG7) options. However, using the supplied EH 6CG7 on the inside and the Sovtek 6N1P on the outside offered some pretty spectacular results. I am not a fan of the Sovtek 6H30P. It just doesn't cut it for me in the Moscode or any other amp that I've heard it in.

Thanks for the comments on a really good amp. And, BTW, break-in is very important with the Moscode. Turn it on when you first get up in the morning each day, it will improve greatly.

Marty

Interesting comment about the Sovtek 6N1P on the inner set. I'll have to try those. I am presently using the stock 6CG7 and a pair of Siemens ECC88. I rolled a pair of well regarded RCA 6CG7 in the inner position with absolutely poor results. Returning the stock 6CG7 returned the midrange, bass and sweet treble that was lacking with the vintage RCA tubes, much to my surprise.

I tried a pair of IEC Mullard Blackburn c.1970 on the outer position, and it was wonderful.

Fun amplifier. I'm having a great time with it.

MGDeWulf · « **Reply #5 on:** 3 Jul 2006, 05:21 pm »

I tried a set of RCA "clear top" 6FQ7's on the outside with decent results, but I didn't care for them on the inside.

I just got a pair of Seimens eCC88 that I can try on the outside. Will pair the Seimens with the 6N1P and the EH 6CG7 to see what happens.

I really enjoy tube rolling in an amp as adaptable as the Moscode, but I can also see where it could drive someone a bit crazy.

Marty

tvad4 · « **Reply #6 on:** 3 Jul 2006, 05:47 pm »

Quote from: MGDeWulf on 3 Jul 2006, 05:21 pm

I really enjoy tube rolling in an amp as adaptable as the Moscode, but I can also see where it could drive someone a bit crazy.

Marty

True. However, I have found almost no bad combinations...just a nice variety of sonic options. I do think replacing the outer tubes reaps significant benefits. Someone could easily replace the outer tubes with a good pair of ECC88/6DJ8/6922 or ECC82/12AU7 and sit back and enjoy the music.

zybar · « **Reply #7 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 01:04 pm »

Any more comments on the amp?

George

arthurs · « **Reply #8 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 02:38 pm »

I'm partial to the stock tubes after a bit of rolling, may do more later, but this is one hell of a nice amp....

zybar · « **Reply #9 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 02:53 pm »

Quote from: arthurs on 7 Aug 2006, 02:38 pm

I'm partial to the stock tubes after a bit of rolling, may do more later, but this is one hell of a nice amp....

How about a little more?

What do you think it compares to or betters and why?

George

95bcwh · « **Reply #10 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 03:10 pm »

Quote from: zybar on 7 Aug 2006, 01:04 pm

Any more comments on the amp?

George

George,
What's stopping you from getting the Moscode for 32 day home trial? They will come and do the pickup if you decide to send it back.. so it's 100% risk free!!

I will order the Moscode, after I'm back from a long vacation in early September.

barry

tvad4 · « **Reply #11 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 05:28 pm »

Quote from: zybar on 7 Aug 2006, 02:53 pm

Quote from: arthurs on 7 Aug 2006, 02:38 pm
I'm partial to the stock tubes after a bit of rolling, may do more later, but this is one hell of a nice amp....

How about a little more?

What do you think it compares to or betters and why?

George

George, having re-read my original post on this amp. The description is pretty complete, and there's not much more that I can add. As I wrote, it's better than my VAC Phi 110/110 in enough aspects that I replaced the VAC. See my post for details.

I have heard it in a system that presently uses a DNA-500, and the Moscode is superior to the DNA-500 in the air and extension and life it brings to the music. The 401HR's bass is not quite as deep as the DNA-500 by a very small margin, but I find the DNA-500's bass to be heavy handed and out of balance with the rest of the frequency spectrum. Just my opinion.

Moscode offers a no-brainer 33 1/3 day trial period. I know of two gentlemen (three including me) who decided to purchase the amp after hearing it in their systems for a week. I also know a fourth gentleman who plans to replace his highly regarded solid state amplifer with the 401HR once he is able to do so.

zybar · « **Reply #12 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 05:30 pm »

Thanks guys.

George

tvad4 · « **Reply #13 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 05:41 pm »

I will add one additional comment to my 401HR observation in comparison to the DNA-500. The 401HR has wonderfully controlled bass. It grabs my 89db/3 ohm minimum loudspeakers in a manner that the VAC could not match. This is one reason why I kept it over the VAC.

IMO, the Moscode gives no ground to the DNA-500 in bass control.

brj · « **Reply #14 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 05:56 pm »

I've heard the Moscode twice now in the same system, and it is a most impressive amp.

I'd be curious to hear it compared to a Van Alstine Fet Valve Ultra 550 amp, but I'm not aware of anyone that has heard both. The Moscode and Ultra 550 are both 200W+ hybrid amps, although I don't know how similar they are beyond that.

zybar · « **Reply #15 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 06:32 pm »

Quote from: tvad4 on 7 Aug 2006, 05:41 pm

I will add one additional comment to my 401HR observation in comparison to the DNA-500. The 401HR has wonderfully controlled bass. It grabs my 89db/3 ohm minimum loudspeakers in a manner that the VAC could not match. This is one reason why I kept it over the VAC.

IMO, the Moscode gives no ground to the DNA-500 in bass control.

Interesting...

Not suprised that the Moscode outperformed the VAC since I felt that even on the Phi 220 mono amps that was the weakest part.

The review I read in TAS stated that the "weakest" part of the Moscode was it's bass performance.

Here is what it said in TAS:

"Despite its raw power, however, the amplifier did display one weakness: deep bass control. Ironically, since Kaye features a picture of himself playing the bass on the first page of the manual and touts the amplifier’s supposed grip on low frequencies, the Moscode’s performance here is not as iron-fisted as it might be. It is, in fact, overripe, tubby, and not, dare it be said, the last word in extension, either."

Anyway, it sounds like maybe I will have to hear the amp at some point in the future.

Thanks again for the follow-up comments.

George

tvad4 · « **Reply #16 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 06:52 pm »

Quote from: zybar on 7 Aug 2006, 06:32 pm

Quote from: tvad4 on 7 Aug 2006, 05:41 pm
I will add one additional comment to my 401HR observation in comparison to the DNA-500. The 401HR has wonderfully controlled bass. It grabs my 89db/3 ohm minimum loudspeakers in a manner that the VAC could not match. This is one reason why I kept it over the VAC.

IMO, the Moscode gives no ground to the DNA-500 in bass control.

Interesting...

Not suprised that the Moscode outperformed the VAC since I felt that even on the Phi 220 mono amps that was the weakest part.

The review I read in TAS stated that the "weakest" part of the Moscode was it's bass performance.

Here is what it said in TAS:

"Despite its raw power, however, the amplifier did display one weakness: deep bass control. Ironically, since Kaye features a picture of himself playing the bass on the first page of the manual and touts the amplifier’s supposed grip on low frequencies, the Moscode’s performance here is not as iron-fisted as it might be. It is, in fact, overripe, tubby, and not, dare it be said, the last word in extension, either."

Anyway, it sounds like maybe I will have to hear the amp at some point in the future.

Thanks again for the follow-up comments.

George

The bass weakness mentioned in the TAS review was quickly addressed by George Kaye in all subsequent 401HR amplifiers and is now a non-issue. I don't recall what exactly was the fix, but Georg Kaye will explain if asked.

The bass in my system is not overripe, tubby nor lacking in extension. If it was, I wouldn't own the amplifier.

95bcwh · « **Reply #17 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 07:21 pm »

tvad4,
Have you tried to pair the Moscode with any SS preamp?? If so, how did the combo sound?

Rgds
barry

tvad4 · « **Reply #18 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 07:56 pm »

Quote from: 95bcwh on 7 Aug 2006, 07:21 pm

tvad4,
Have you tried to pair the Moscode with any SS preamp?? If so, how did the combo sound?

Rgds
barry

No. This is not something that interests me.

Double Ugly · « **Reply #19 on:** 7 Aug 2006, 09:21 pm »

Quote from: tvad4 on 7 Aug 2006, 06:52 pm

The bass weakness mentioned in the TAS review was quickly addressed by George Kaye in all subsequent 401HR amplifiers and is now a non-issue. I don't recall what exactly was the fix, but Georg Kaye will explain if asked.

The bass in my system is not overripe, tubby nor lacking in extension. If it was, I wouldn't own the amplifier.

Here's a snippet from George Kaye's response to Jacob Heilbrunn's TAS review, which can be found in its entirety at the end of this .pdf reprint:

"Mr. Heilbrunn is exactly right about the bass. We’re always looking for ways to improve the Moscode Experience, and we found one in the output stage biasing circuit. The new bias design extends the ultra low bass response by a factor of two resulting in improved bass definition and punch. This improved bias circuit can be found in every 401HR we sell."