Adcom GFP750 ??????

Don't waste your time.adcom is WAY over priced for what your hearing in return!!Far,Very far, from ANYWHERE NEAR audiophile quality.Dump all your adcom and upgrade to better components your ears will thank you[think about it]There build quality has went in the tank years ago,ask your self this,why is there ALWAYS & ALWAYS so much adcom for sale on the used market?Get smart buy QUALITY!!!!!!!!

I have a GFP 750. I too was intrigied by the rave reviews. I replaced a Linn majik preamp, the Adcom was vastly superior in all areas. I don't understand why James Bond is so hateful to Adcom, yeah you can do better but for the money Adcom is pretty good especially this one. What sold me is that Wes Phillips from Sterephile said that he could not tell the Adcom apart from the Levinson 380S in a sighted comparison. Who are you gonna believe Wes Phillips or James Bond? The build quality is totally top notch. I bet Bond has not even heard this unit. Good Luck

I hate it when people like Ron007 make comments about a component they have never heard in their system or know anything specific about it all (just the brand). Nobody wants to hear your erroneous information. Ejlif, on the other hand, contributes an informed opinion about the product; something we do want to hear.

I personally own a GFP-750 and I can honestly say it is the only preamp that has stayed in my reference system for more than a couple of months. Previous preamps include VTL 2.5, ARC LS-7, C-J Premier 3, Hafler 915 and a couple of Creeks. It is a wonderful unit that has both passive and active modes. It just gets out of the way of the music. I have not had anything good to say about any other Adcom unit but this one is an exception.

It' funny that some folks still have a beef with Adcom equipment based on older models. While I may not classify the GFP-750 as 'class A' I also wouldn't take one magazines opinion as the total truth - magazines have an agenda and they need to be paid by their advertizers to continue reviewing.....take them with that grain of salt. That said, consider this: The Adcom GFP-750 is essentialy the Pass Labs Aleph P with a few changes. The three that I know of is the volume pot (Pass uses stepped resistors), balance control (Pass has none) and that the gain is fixed (not adjustable) on the Adcom. The two units, however, sound very similar. Consider also that the Aleph P costs $2800 dollars more than the Adcom. Is the price difference worth it? Perhaps it is to someone who may be embarassed to own Adcom equipment or to someone who wants the preamp to go with their Aleph 0's. Certainly I would want the Pass unit myself - a status symbol of sorts, but I've got too much of a 'real world' budget for such posturing. I've listened to the Aleph P and GFP-750 in my system and have found them both to be fast and detailed with excellent soundstaging. The both drove my amplifier(s) to levels that I did not know they were capable of. Gone is the dry, forward sound of the old Adcom; it has ben replaced by speed, accuracy and a great sense of dimensionality. If you're looking for the euphony, added warmth or liquidity that some believe makes something 'audiophile quality', then what you want is a tube preamp. To me, maximum fidelity to the original recording (more specificaly, the original electrical signal) is what the GFP-750 provides.

I have a GFP 75o, and old ARC SP-11 and a Melos Maestro Gold driving Melos Monoblocks or Bryston 7B Monoblocks with Dunlavy SC V speakers. My primary source is a Theta Data III to a Genesis Digital Lens optionally a Z-Systems rdp-1 digital preamp and a Theta Pro Gen Va upgraded to 24/96. I can drive my amps directly from the Gen Va using the Z- Systems. I use quattro fil on the audio and Orchids as the digital interconnect. I only use the GFP-750 in the Passive mode. It is quite somewhat drier compared to direct onto the monoblocks. It is fairly interconnect and amp sensitive. It does add hum compared to staight in. These are all minor changed compared to what the active preamps add. However many recordings subjectively sound better with the euphonious additions of the active preamps. In my experience with carefull listening to multiple combinations, Woodman above matches my experience.

here i go talking out of my hat again-----havent heard this unit but adcom abshing seems to be popular. the amps are better than the old generation of preamps, the 565 si NOT comparable to the sp10m as gary galo stated in stereophile. thats one thing i really appreciate about tas(among many another), the comments by other reviewers on the same equip. yes it happens in stereophile but not nearly as often as i like. instead of listening to the naysayers, try the cheeeep way out with adcom. you could afford to keep one around for odd jobs too.