Belles vs Marsh

Mated to the Marsh a400 amp, I prefered the Marsh p2000t pre-amp over it's ss sibling. Thought it a touch more musical in all the ways that tube lovers describe the difference between tubes vs ss. HOWEVER - I also thought that the music played made a slight difference in which pre I would choose. For rock and roll and such, I liked the quickness of the ss pre - it got completely out of the way and let all the edge thru on the guitar licks and the snap of the snares. But for classical piano and female torch singers, the tube pre just made it sound so full and completely live I was amazed. The difference isn't a loss of detail so much as an enhanced smoothness and musicality. Also, since I have alot of relatively rough early recordings, where "edge" is not an asset, I preferred the tube unit. But both were utterly dead silent when not playing - recordings are unadorned, uncolored, and unaccompanied (precisely as I believe they should be!). Not that either of the two Marsh pre's don't do some particular sound well - both are terrific values, IMHO. The differences are really really subtle, and I'd highly recommend either preamp (esp with the matching amps).

I don't know the Belles pre, so no comment there.

chas

Sean:

Excellent review!

One item I've always had difficulty with was grasping concept of "pace". Would you mind giving us a brief once over on that? It would lead in nicely to explain the one difference you and I had with the ss version of this pre - I definitely didn't sense any lack of "punch" with it, but then I certainly don't have the experience with it you have, auditioning it with several amp combo's. In any event, thanks for your (once again) superb review.

chas