I read in the sixmoons review, "The preamp is remote controlled and offers 2 outputs for biamping or adding a subwoofer, as well as having a passive pass-thru that operates with the unit in the off position. " Does that mean it can be used as a passive pre? If so, how do you do that? |
|
By a used one and resell for what you paid, more or less. I know Spencer has has many good preamps and he can comment on the relative merits of the Dodd versus them. My Dodd arrived today and I will be comparing to my BENT and Atma-sphere, and comaprisons with CAT, Joule, ARC and Lamm pres I've owned recently. I suspect the DOdd is killer with some tube rolling; I'll be using Amperex. |
Hi Glory. I'll just make the general comment that for me, tube preference (or evaluation) is completely (almost) dictated by the circuit it is used in and the system context, as performance is strongly related to those factors. In other words, I'm rarely comfortable with a statment like tube x sounds like this, and tube y sounds like that as a general proposition, it is very system dependent. In some systems for example, I need, prefer Siemens 5814s, in others RCA 12au7s -- which is better? Depends. As far as the Dodd, Amperex seems to be preferred by Gary and a few others - which of course doesn't mean I would not like the Siemens, but I suspect that the Siemens might be too much of a good thing (they tend towards speed, transparency, clarity) with the Dodd. I think of tubes as spices, different soups, different spices.
What I do think, not having yet heard it, is that the off-the grid, and simple circuit of the Dodd will let you hear differences between various tubes more easily -- the circuit gets out of the way. We'll see.... |
Well, of course I could not wait for the Amperexs to arrive. The Dodd is really wonderful. It seems to have the dynamics of the CAT SL1 which was the best I've had in terms of dynamic contrast. It seems to have the quietness of a passive, which may account for the great dynamic contrasts. While passive quiet, it does have tube bloom (distortion?) which tube users love, but certainly not slow and colored - very neutral, not disimilar to the BENT TAP or the Atma-sphere in that sense. I'm not sure I would like it much "warmer", it seems right to me. Bass seems ample, well defined, and it breathes. My speakers have no output below 28hz, so what deep bass weakness the pre may have, I don't hear it. I go back and forth between the Dodd and the BENT TAP, and really it is a tossup though they sound a bit different - both excellent preamps. You could certainly live with the Dodd for a long time and if you let yourself, not be thinking about the next upgrade. I'll have to decide whether to keeps this or the BENT as I feel a bit silly having two preamps for my Music Reference amp - the Dodd really is beautiful to look at though.... |
Well, if this thing is going to get better with break-in, I'm all for it, I love it out of the box, and that with the JJs which most folks don't seem to LOVE - they sound might fine to me, but I am eager for the Amperex to arrive, I'm getting some 58-60 D-Getters which are suppose to be the "sweetest" of the Amperexes. This pre is DYNAMIC.
I'm selling the BENT. Not becuase the Dodd is "better", the BENT is one heck of a fine sounding piece. But, I've falling in love with the looks of the wood paneling on the Dodd. There is definitely something to this "off the grid" thing; and now with the Dodd and RWA you can be off the grid and active. |
Mrjstark. The BENT is gone, and I will miss it -- the best passive I have heard after trying 4 or five of them, but I don't like equipment on the sidelines. A very recommended piece for the "right" system.
I love the Dodd for sound, but the looks don't hurt. Your right about the JJ - no problem as far as I can tell, but tube rolling is one of the "pleasures" of tube pres versus passive or SS - more fun and games.
If I prefer the Dodd to some degree over the BENT and other passives, it is proabably due to the BAM (bass augmentation module) used by my Merlin speakers that goes between source and pre - and according to Bobby (Mr. Merlin) the BAM sound best with a tube buffer and with the Dodd 200ohm out put (yeah!)it bufferes very well indeed and can proabably drive any cable/amp load. I'll comment again when I get the Amperexes, though those JJs are not bad at all. |
The gain switch would be a fantastic feature to add to the Dodd. I can run passive with no gain issues, it would very nice to have 0, +6db, +16db (or someting like that) toggle switch, but alas. I do agree that it would be a pretty important feature for use with different front ends and/or amps. I asked Gary if I could reduce the gain, giving me more play with the volume control, but it does not appear it can be done - unless I misunderstood him.
I would like to thank Spencer (sbank) for recommending I try the Dodd; I'm glad I did. |
I think soundstage depth is comparable, but the Dodd seems a bit wider. What is more noticeable to my is the slightly better dynamics of the active - but this is hair splitting -the BENT in the right system works very well in most audio regards. I think the move from passive resistor to tvc/avc is much bigger that the difference between the BENT and the Dodd. I suspect tube rolling will also take the Dodd in different directions. |
Es347, what I think you might find interesting is what tubes can do for you that you might like. The Dodd is not tubey in the classic sense, it is very neutral and balance in the bass and treble, but it does have bloom and very realistic portrayl of space and instruments within the soundstage that I can never seem to get from SS pres or amps. This sort of thing is addictive, or not, but tubes can do this in a way that SS never has to my ears. What is also nice about the Dodd is you can proabably run it for 20,000 hours without having to worry about replacing the the tubes and with a 200ohm output impedance, which is very low for a tube preamp, you can drive almost any amp, including the McCormack. I don't know if you will prefer it to the SS you are accustomed to, but it will be different, and IMHO a more musical rendering - but I don't and can't settle the SS/tube argument... |
I'll have to live with 10:00, at least with the RM9s (1.1v sensitivity), good thing is that unlike the CAT SL1 which had large steps, the Dodd volume control is pretty granular in steps so it easy to find the right volume level. Whether not going further along the attenuator makes any significant different in impedances I don't know, but it sure sounds good as is. |
Of course I have not stopped thinking about the Isabella, as the Dodd sounds so good in my system I'm starting to feel the need to compare the two based on the comments above -- darn! Not sure which I would prefer, but I sure get the sense that both may SOTA. |
I suspect there is no way to try Isabella and not feel compelled to give the 30.2 a try. Well, with a 30 day trial it might make sense - oh no.... I'm going to give the Dodd some time with the Amperex, and then... well, you can see it coming. |
The Amperexes are locked in my mail room so no go this weekend. But, I'm getting the sense that the Dodd is on the warm side of neutral, which suprises me a bit as some comments regarding the Isabella speaks to an even smoother, sweeter presentation; for me, that might be too much of a good thing as the Dodd seems just about right to me used with the Music Reference RM9 (might be a different story with other amps) and I noticed the same sonic signature the Dodd is used with the Atma-sphere M60s (which are more neutral and transparent in a very natural way when used with the MP-3). Of course, some people think the Atma-sphere stuff is lean, I think it is very accurate and real sounding. |
Very true. And interesting how much audio reviewing focuses on an individual piece of equipment with little focus on system context and combinations. For example if I were reviewing the Atma-sphere M60s with a Dodd versus the Atma pre, I would ascribe very different attributes to the M60s. Makes the good, better, best questions regarding equipment obviously difficult to answer. But in my system with the Music Reference amps, the Dodd sounded better to me facing a fairly strong lineup of preamps - it is no doubt a very good preamp worth auditioning, no matter what you are willing to pay for a preamp. Will it be your cup of tea? No substitute for listening. |
Looks like he selling direct now, and lowered the price to $2,600. I'm not sure what the "returns" experience is for those providing 30-day trials (Placette, Red Wine,etc.) But it seems that dealer sales as a model is at the very least being challenged for 2-channel audio; I've got to believe most are surviving on HT and installations. It seems to me that if your going to sell direct, you can cover "returns" after 30-days as a cost of doing business (should there be damage etc.) with no middle man to take a piece of the pie. |
They will be White Label 6922s with the D-Getter (late 50s?)from Andy Bowman at Vintage Tube Services. Should arrive shortly. |
What I love about the J is NPs decision to give it that very high input impedance (242kohm) specifically for the purpose of making it an easy load for tube preamps - a smart idea as the combination of a good tube preamp with the J is as Glenn now knows is a killer "low cost" combination; it would also proabably be very receptive to a passive preamp like a Bent Tap X. The one caveat with the J is you need "tube friendly" speakers for it to work best (highish and smooth impedance) - like the Merlins. With more "difficult" speakers I would make the move to the Pass XA30.5 with the Dodd - while the XA30.5 is not as easy a load for tube preamps, the Dodd has a very low (200ohm) output impedance for a tube preamp making it very capable of driving most SS amps - even the 15kohm XA30.5. |
Well, what I ended up getting are a matched pair of Amperex 6dj8s from 1958 made in Holland with the "D" getter. All I can say is that any comments about the Dodd must be made with regard to the tubes being used. As good as the Dodd is with the JJs, the Amperexes really take it up a notch in an obvious manner. Smoother, more textured, and much more holographic - in other words fantastic. What is certain is that the Dodd is a SOTA preamp platform for letting whatever tubes you use in it shine. I'm sure there will be debates between the Dodd and RWA contingents, and though I'm a curious audiophile that likes to try equipment more than I should, I'm keeping the Dodd for a while, at least:) At $2,600 (the new lower direct price, was $3,300), this preamp is perfectly capable of taking on much more expensive competitors - many of which I have owned. Try some NOS tubes in this thing, I don't think you will be disappointed. |
I'm not sure if it is called Bugle Boy. It is the first 6dj8 that Amperex made and it has D Getter, and is made in Holland. It is the very first tube listed on Andy's stock list, and not cheap. I'm using the Dodd with a Music Reference RM9 Special Edition which is quite nuetral tonally and Merlin VSMs so if the Amperex is generally warm it would be a good match for my system. If the Siemens are like other Siemens, it will certainly leaner (more linear?) than the Amperex. I wish I bought these tubes at the drugstore when the $1 :). |
It took 8 days to get the tubes. He does take longer than some, but they actually seem to be matched and quiet. My only gripe is that the prices posted on the website seems to be a few years old; he should either keep it up to date or post no picing at all. Not sure how they compare in terms of dynamics or extremes; so far it is just my oberall impressi8on of a much more realistic and beleivable presentation. I ne4ed toto go back to analyze the differences a bit more. But my gut reaction was that I defintely preferred the Amperexs, and in my system not too warm. |
Then I'm ptetty sure mine are not "Bugle Boy" as I think these were made prior to the Bugle Boy marketing campaign. I think Andy said they were from 1958 they year Amperex introduced the 6dj8 to the market. |
I took them out and looked at them and they are the earliest version with just Amperex EC88 written on them with "Made in Holland" labeling. They predate the Bugle Boy production run from early 1958. I have no idea if they are the "best of the best", but they sure do sound very musical and three-dimensional. I've ordered some Ameperex Orange Globe 6dj8 "A-Frame" that others have also recommended. I think some warmth in my pre serves my amp and speakers well. I also have an Atma-pre and amp and I tend to prefer the RCA 12au7 Blackgates in the pre to Siemens 5814 - another case where I prefer a bit of warmth to absolute linear sound. |
Interesting how many folks are using Dodd with Merlins. I wonder what the connection is? Glenn, great SS is almost always Class A, and Class A is always hot, but the J really isn't too bad, you should have felt the Aleph 3. At least you can get buy with 30 watts:) |
Spencer, I totally agree on the importance on neutrality/transparency to the source as the guiding principle for building a system - otherwise you end up with mix and match synergies that is more like a bandaid approach to getting good sound and you end up having to take a new system approach when you change pieces and what "helped" in one system may too much or too little woth a new component. I think the Dodd and Merlin (and the CAT gear) follow the principle of basic neutrality without too much flavor, in either case if you need mathcing colorations neither may seem to work just right, but in combination they make for a very good pairing indeed. I notice there are now at least 4 Dodd/Merlin pairings (including us) which seems like a lot given there can't be that many Dodd sold yet. Neutrality also seems to be one of the secrets to the Atma/Merlin, CAT/Merlin, and Berning/Merlin combos - none are overtly colored and all highly resolving while musical. Paul. |
