Bondman- Any thoughts of running full-range into the Ohm's? In my (limited) experience it can aid in breaking them in and deciding at what frequency to cross-over the sub at. The Ohm's I have (MWT's) handle bass better than any speaker I've had above 40 hz. |
Bondman,
Good signs indeed!
"So, two discs, the same signal chain, and two very different results. I suppose that this is what is meant by good systems providing garbage-in, garbage-out."
No doubt the OHMs will not dress up bad recordings, but I do find they can most always deliver whatever there might be to enjoy in most any recording. |
Hmmmm....
Let's suppose, theoretically, that a guy with a birthday coming up in a few months, who owned Ohm Walsh 100 s-3's, was toying with the idea of getting a higher powered integrated amp for his speakers. This guy currently has a Unison Unico, which is a tube-SS hybrid that puts out 80 watts/channel into 8 ohms. It plays plenty loud in this guy's small-ish room, but he's curious about what more power "breathing room" would do for the Ohms.
What would you suggest as a move up? Or should he just stay put? |
Parasound - Your idea is actually a very good one. First, I agree, it should aid in the burn-in process. Second, my comments would be more relevent if I listen to them full-range. That said, you've got to hear the Vandersteen 2Wq to understand how well they work. Completely different presentation from your typical home theater burp-box, and very easy to blend with one's main speakers.
Rebbi - I would certainly try some out to see if an upgrade is worthwhile. What kind of budget are looking at? Does your Unico have pre-outs? If so, you might consider a separate power amp, especially if you like the Unico's character. |
Rebbi - I'm just throwing out ideas, others here might have better recommendations, but 3 things you could try:
1.An NAD - C -375BEE - (150W)
2.Switch to seperates - Maybe something like Audio by VanAlstine - you can put together a tube pre with a solid state amp.
3.Send your integated to Underwood hifi: http://www.underwoodhifi.com/mod_unison.html |
Zkzpb8,
Thanks a lot for the suggestions! I'd be looking to keep this under $1500 for an integrated amp... I figure I can still get around $800 for the Unico here on A'gon, which would take the sting out of the purchase price.
I was thinking of the C375BEE -- Sam Tellig just gave it a glowing review in Stereophile -- seems like a lot of bang for the buck. And I stopped into a local dealer who said he'd let me take it home overnight to see how it sounds in my system.
Never looked at Audio by VanAlstine but I will.
I spoke to Wally at Underwood. I don't know if he's still selling mods to the Unico. He's stopped selling Unison retail -- told me that the MSRP's had risen so much recently that they just weren't a good value anymore.
Bondmanp,
Sadly, no pre-outs on the Unico. |
Rebbi,
I think that you can buy a new Bel Canto integrated amp in your price range. I've used this combo (Bel Canto s300 w/Ohm 100 S3)and it works very well. The S-300 offers a pre-out (if you ever want to add a sub), but not a power in (if you want to actively roll off your mains when you add that sub). Kind of a "glass half full".
The good news is that you might even be able to go with Bel Canto separates at/near your price point if you buy used. Check the A'gon listings. This set-up offers full (bi-amping or switching to a different power amp if you so choose in the future) flexibility going forward, and a stacked pair of small, matching Bel Canto chassis echos the uncluttered look of an integrated.
Good Luck,
Marty |
Rebbi,
For greatest potential improvement, I'd look towards the separates if viable for you. I doubt you could go wrong with Bel Canto for compactness or even Musical Fidelity or Classe (those would be leading contenders were it me). A nice inexpensive used tube pre-amp ( with SS amp is also something to consider. An ARC might be too expensive, but a VTL or JUicy, BAT, or several others I've researched and/or had recommended could be interesting. |
Audiogoner DarkMobius has offered me up some very reliable advice on multiple occasions and recommended these tube pre-amps in the $1K-$2K range to me a while back:
ARC, CAT, BAT, Modwright 9.0, VTL, Cary, Air Tight, Melody |
Rebbi, if you can wait for one to come up as they seem to, the VTL 2.5 is a preamp that's inexpensive used. I recently purchased one and mine is very quiet and has that tube sound with a dimensional quality. |
Martykl,
That little Bel Canto S300 looks like a winner, and I've seen a couple of them go on A'gon for around $1000. I'll check back daily and see if one comes up here at a good price.
Mapman,
Separates may be the way to go, ultimately, but I don't think I have the budget for them at this time. :-( |
Hmmmm....
Maybe I can take back that last comment about not being able to afford separates. I see, for example, plenty of used, tube preamps on Audiogon for not a lot of money... many under $700. What makes and models would you folks recommend keeping an eye out for in the used, tube preamp arena? |
Reb,
I think you can do it for $1500 and separates can deliver better performance, especially since you already have the separate phono pre-amp.
You could do a Juicy Music Peach + Musical Fidelity A3CR or something similar for about that. That would have been my choice at that price point had I not gone for the more expensive ARC pre-amp (with phono). |
Update: Vinyl! Finally tried some vinyl on the 2000s this weekend. I have an original VG+ Fredereick Fennel conducting a Cole Porter song book, a Mercury Living Presence Wilma Cozart (pre-Fine) production. Sound was very good, very clear, and again, with marvelously true-sounding timbre. So far, truth of timbre seems to be the Walsh 2000's strongest attribute, followed closely by detail retrieval. Even on a mono copy of "Invitation to the Dance", sound was spacious and full (although of course not as widely-staged as stereo LPs). Perez Prado - "Prez" in RCA Living Stereo (older pressing but not a shaded dog), was dynamic and exciting, with great horn sound - not too edgy, but plenty of bite and blat. Drums were especially realistic on this LP. An Isaac Stern Mozart recording from the 1970's was less appealing, but I am guessing it was the LP, which seemed to have a miniaturized soundstage.
I then played a few cuts from some Sheryl Crow CDs that would give me trouble on the Vandersteens. Especially "Safe and Sound" - a terrific song, btw - would sound very congested and pinched during the louder passages toward the end of the track. The 2000s passed this test very well, pushing Crow's voice back in the mix a bit relative to the Vandersteens. Not necessarily better, but different, and this allowed the band to be heard more clearly. Soundstage on this cut should, and did, extend into the room. The producer uses phase to make some of the sound sound like it is coming right out of your ears. I heard this with the 2000s, but to a slightly lesser degree than the Vandersteens, which was a bit of a surprise. But the greatly reduced sence of congestion and pinchiness during the louder passages was a real home run.
I am expecting the support pads from Ohm soon. Once in place, these should stabilize the 2000s on my uneven floor, and I can revisit some of the tunes I've played.
I still haven't tried them without the subs, or dialed-in the subs for the 2000s, but I will. Just need time!
Rebbi - I use a Conrad-Johnson PV-11 w/phono I got here on the 'gon a few years ago for $800. I am very happy with this unit, and it will probably be in my rack for a long time. Keep an eye out for one if you are thinking of separates. |
Bondmanp,
I like hearing Sheryl Crow on my 100's, too. Some of the tunes on her greatest hits CD sound wonderful there -- and I know what you mean about the engineers using "phasey" tricks to get the sound to do dramatic things. The bongos on "Every Day Is A Winding Road" sound especially great. :-) |
Check out this outstanding review of the Ohm MicroWalsh Tall SE in Stereo Times:
http://www.stereotimes.com/speak092409.shtml |
OK, the pads and shims came the other day. Although using these has made the 2000s much more stable, they are not rock solid. Interestingly, John Strohbeen has let me know that Walsh speakers, because they fire downwards, are not as sensitive to cabinet movement as conventional dynamic speakers. It does make sense, I suppose. The pads and shims did seem to improve transient attack sounds slightly. If I end up keeping the 2000s, I may experiment with some carpet spikes anyway.
BTW, over last weekend, I heard a six-figure analog system with well-known speakers that sell for over $30K/pr. I can't say if it was the speakers, room or electronics, but I don't think my modest system gives up very much to this mega-buck rig. Quite a feeling (that I chose not to share with the system's owner).
Listened to Lisa Loeb "Tails" on CD. Really beautiful overall. Again, listened to the whole CD (something I rarely did with the Vandys). I actually look forward to sitting down and listening - another new thing for me!
Starting to think that my Vandy subs are fine set right where they are. They're up in level a bit versus the Vandersteen 1Cs, but still blend seemlessly, and I enjoy the extra bass output on most things I have played. Jury still out on this one. I hope to try running the 2000s full range over the weekend. Stay tuned! |
"I actually look forward to sitting down and listening"
That's the acid test for anybody's system IMHO.
Effects of stability may be different with the vertical firing OHMs, but a square and solid foundation is always desirable IMHO. IT might take some fidgeting but should not be too hard to accomplish from my experience. |
My left speaker rocks a little... I can't tell if it's an inconsistency in the hardwood floor, or if the bottom plinth of the speaker isn't quite flat. In any case, a couple of judiciously placed, folded pieces of paper seems to do the trick.'
Bondmanp,
I got to listen to some Sade on vinyl this morning: "Is It A Crime" and "War Of The Hearts." I was enchanted, especially by the latter. Don't know if it's that the speakers are finally really broken in, or if I've really nailed the placement thing, but man! The room was totally energized in that distinctive "Ohm way," I was hearing all this detail and depth. Enchanting is the best word I can come up with. I listened so long I was late for work. Oops! |
Rebbi - that's why I avoid my system on weekday mornings! And I also enjoy Sade a lot. Last night I listened to the standard CD of Pink Floyd's "Wish You were Here." I chose this specifically because it was nearly unlistenable on the Vandersteens. While it is obviously a poorly mastered CD, I really enjoyed listening to it. I followed that with Porcupine Tree (Prog-Rock theme-night), "In Absentia." Got to say I wasn't feeling it, but I was very tired by this point. It sounded very good, but something wasn't clicking; I was missing the emotional involvement I have experienced a few times with other music on my Ohms. I think this is a well-produced CD, maybe my expectations were too high. Anyway, the 2000s are surely not broken in yet, so I am not rushing to judgement.
Mapman - I agree that I should at least try some kind of base with spikes, but why square? Wouldn't a three-point spiked base work as well? That's what the Vandersteens use. My floor is very uneven, so adjustable-height spikes would be helpful. But unless I can find something cheap, this will have to wait a while. |
Bondman,
Three point is fine. YOu just want stability however you accomplish it.
Bondman,
I had similar experience with limited dynamics on Porcupine Tree albums mainly FOABP early on with my new F-5s even in comparison with my old OHM Ls. BReak in and better amp matching definitely helped.
The PT tree albums I have heard on my system (Deadwing and FOABP) are a good acid test. These albums only sound best LOUD, IMO! |
Hey, Guys,
Somebody's currently got a Bel Canto Design EVo 200.2 power amp on sale here for $650 OBO. It's got fabulous reviews all over the 'Net. What do you guys think of that as a foundation for use with the Ohm's? Hurry!!!!!! |
Rebbi, never heard it but it has good reviews and seems a viable candidate to run the 100s. Spec, vintage and cost wise, it is in the same ballpark as the Musical Fidelity A3CR I use. I think you would have to try it and see. If you do not overpay, you can always resell.
BTW, when I acquired the A3CR, I had no idea how well it would work and was totally prepared to resell and move up to more juice right away, mainly for the Walsh 5s, but whenever I listen on either 100s or 5s I just have not felt compelled to change. |
One more thought on OHM Walshes and Porcupine Tree.
One thing the omni OHM Walshes do not do inherently is "kick you in the face" when playing harder forms of rock music, as many more directional designs will.
Sometimes with harder forms of rock specifically, you want to be kicked in the face with the power of the music. The OHMs are capable of delivering power behind most any kind of music with right amplification, but they will always tend to be more laid back in presentation.
The other end of the speaker design spectrum in this regard are probably high efficiency and traditional directional design horn loaded speakers, like Klipsch and their ilk.
I do think I will acquire a pair of high efficiency horns just to experience the difference someday when I figure out a good way to fit them into my system, maybe as an alternative to the Dynaudios I currently use, if I can bring myself to part with those as well. Also, the room I use the DYns in is only 12X12 and has high WAF requirements, so options are limited.
I can see a pair of horn loaded speakers supplementing my OHMs but not replacing either pair at present. We'll see.... |
Mapman, it is rare that I disagree with you, but on this I must. My MWT's are, by far, the best 'heavy music' speakers I've ever owned.
Specifically, Porcupine Tree's musit 'hits' me at an emotional level I hadn't experienced before. When my wife askes why I seem to always listen to PT, my answer is that the Ohm's seem to have been made for that music in paricular. Especially on the keyboard and guitar work, they plain kick-but. |
I guess I will have to revisit PT CDs when the 2000s are fully broken in.
I removed the Vandy subs from the signal path to run the 2000s full range for a while. A brief listen to the Stereophile Test CD #2 was revealing. I was surprised by the low and mid bass extension and definition, clearly strong output to well below 40Hz, as demonstrated with the bass solo track, the organ piece, and the Corey Greenberg composition.
The phase test was also interesting. When the out-of-phase voice and instrument were in the right channel (along which I have a straight wall), the sound clearly came from way behind me to my right, over my shoulder. In the left channel, however, where the room opens up before the listening position, it still sounded "phase-y", but did not come from behind me.
Although the 2000s seem to do bass very well, they actually affirmed my impression of the Vandy subwoofers. The sonic character of the bass did not seem any different, except for a little less feel-it-in-your-gut sensation. This speaks well of both the Ohm 2000s and the Vandy 2Wq.
A co-worker that I am converting to an audiophile is stopping by tonight with some of his favorite recordings for a little listening and comparison between the Vandersteen 1Cs and Ohm Walh 2000s. Should be fun! |
Parasound,
Don't get me wrong, the OHM Walshes do very well with heavy rock music. I'm just saying they are inherently laid back. ALong with that, they do not induce fatigue while listening which makes for very good extended listening sessions.
I'm just saying that I have heard PT's FOABP in particular on my OHM Ls in the same room. Ls are forward firing 3-way bookshelf designs and way more forward sounding at most all frequencies than Walshs. They also are clearly inferior with most kinds of music. But for that album, there was something different and likable there. Not necessarily even better, just different and likable. |
Ah, got it, Mapman. I still think that by 'laid back', you're referring to accuracy. I could be mistaken :P
Bondman, I'm really interested with your take on PT with your 2000's. I'm also very interested in the Vandy subs you have- I believe they run parallel to the mains. Eventually I'll be investing in a quality sub, although no time soon. |
Para,
Accuracy may be part of it, but I don't think it is the whole story.
When I saw PT live a year or so back in a moderately small club venue, the sound was very loud, very clean and very in your face, the loudest concert I've been to where my ears did not hurt after wards.
I think Bondman hit it well when he described the effect of adding the sub as supplementing the "feel-it-in-your-gut" sensation.
I also suspect that moving up to a really big, juicy monster amp (250w/ch or more, doubling into 4 and 2 ohm) with the OHMs alone would have similar effect based on some accounts I have read on the web. |
http://reviews.audioreview.com/blog/indepth-user-review-of-the-high-end-but-money-saving-ohm-microwalsh-talls/
Another new OHM MWT review. |
Again, you have a good point, Mapman. I have a Parasound 2205A, running 220 watts @ 8 ohms w/60 amps of current available. Could have something to do with the presentation I'm getting... |
My co-worker/budding audiophile stopped by Monday evening. Unfortunately, his burned CD-R of his favorites wouldn't play, so we will try it again some evening. But we listened for a while to both the Vandersteen 1Cs and the Ohm Walsh 2000s. No question the Ohms were easier to listen to, if a bit less dynamic (still not broken in). Before he left, I hooked up the Vandy subs again. Just needed to feel that bass again.
I have two question for Ohm Walsh owners:
Once fully broken in, were the vocals from your Walsh's still very laid back?
Also, and I'd never thought I'd say this, I am bothered by the feeling that the 2000s are a bit recessed in the brightness range, 4-8kHz. This lends cymbals, for example, a more tizzy feel, and a less metalic feel. It seems as thought the Walsh driver rolls off too soon before it hands off to the tweeter at ~8kHz. Is this another burn-in issue, or is that a characteristic of the later Ohm Walsh designs with added tweeters?
I was listening to some R.E.M. last night. The electric guitar, while clear & clean as a bell, overpowered everything, especially the vocals. I could barely hear the vocals. I am sure it's a lousy recording, but the sense of being laid back was extreme. Also listened to Ani DiFranco - "Evolve" - on CD. Here, the laid back quality of the 2000s combined with the CD's in-yer-face mix to balance out very nicely. The horns on several tracks, intentionally set low in the mix, were very sweet and real sounding.
Yes, Parasound, the Vandy 2Wq subs run parallel to the mains, in a setup similar to REL. However, unlike the RELs, the Vandy does provide hi-pass filtering for your mains via an in-line filter between preamp and amp, and a compensating curve in the subs' built-in amp. A truly seemless blend, at least in my experience. |
"Once fully broken in, were the vocals from your Walsh's still very laid back? "
They are very neutral, not inherently bright or forward I would say, but
I think it will depend on room, setup, electronics and other factors, but no, not inherently.
Break in will make a lot of difference in this regard, whether its the speaker breaking in or your ears adjusting to the new sound or a combo of both (most likely the case).
The OHM Walshes are inherently more laid back than forward sounding in general, but the vocals themselves are not relative to the rest. They are generally very clear and right there where they should be on my system.
Now the Walsh 5s are highly adjustable at the speaker, including presence/midrange, but I do not find myself using these much to compensate for anything.
The toe-out trick, exposing the tweeters somewhat more directly in fron of you main listening position, can always be used to brighten things up a bit as well if needed.
IC tweaks can also have a good effect if needed.
Tizzy cymbals should not occur in any case.
At locations well off axis from the tweeters, the top end will drop off but everything else should remain clear and highly coherent.
Lesser recordings in general will sound more laid back than others, I would say. |
The Walsh woofer is deficient at the extreme ends of it's bandwidth until it is fully broken in. So before breakin, you will not get the extreme bottom end thundering bass. And the upper treble range from 4-8 khz will sound recessed. Rest assured, this range will become quite vivid and nuanced when the driver is fully broken in. My suggestion is to play lots of piano music - let a CD repeat at moderate levels overnight. This will break that woofer in nicely at the top end. Better yet, get a CD of Bach music and run that for 24 hours at moderate loudness - you will hear a difference! |
I find the treble on my Walsh 5000's to be clean, resolved and extended. But it will all depend on what's going on upstream. My expereience with the Walsh drivers has been that the highs can sound recessed if gear upstream does not match well and if your amp is lacking in current. The 5000's require current, watts, the right cables, you name it. I have been going through trial and error to dial in the sound. Now that it appears to be dialed in the supertweeter up top is the cleanest and most grain free of all the speakers I've had. These are super smooth in the top end but you can sure here the blat of trumpet or the grit in the reed of sax. |
Foster, how is the McCormack amp working out?
That, Bryston, a beefier MF, or one of the better Class Ds are the top contenders for me for an upgrade to an even juicier amp for my 5s. |
Mapman, the DNA-500 is finally working out well. It would appear on paper that the 500 paired with the Walsh 5000 speakers would be an easy slam dunk. But we know that what's on paper is meaningless. I have still had to do plenty of experimentation to get the system sounding special. It actually has taken a power cord shuffle on the amp, and the addition of a top flight parametric equalizer that I've reconfigured several times. Getting the 5000 speakers to sing with force and power has not been easy (partly its the room). Finally, last night I was listening to a Horace Silver disc I recently purchased, "Paris Blues," and the beauty and refinement of this live recording hit me hard on an emotional level, really sounding incredible! I never felt anything like this before listening to music on any earlier rigs. Other guys have mentioned experiences like this, but I never experienced it before. The funny thing is I had the World Series on my TV with the sound turned down, but the game was almost irrelevant since "Paris Blues" was tearing me apart. |
Foster,
Nice. Cliff Lee and Chaase Utley tearing apart the Yankees had me feeling pretty good around that time also!
Any observations regarding the McCormack amp compared to the others you tried prior with the 5s? |
Mapman, Mamboni, Foster: Thanks for the info. Just to be clear, I don't find the treble above 8kHz recessed, but rather the octave below 8kHz. If anything, the treble above 8kHz has a bit too much zing, with occasionally over-emphasized sibilants, especially on vocals. These may be a source material issue, however. I have toed-in the speakers slightly.
Power-wise, as I've mentioned, I think I am covered with my Odyssey Audio HT-3. I will eventually get to IC, speaker cable and power cord upgrades, but I've blown my budget for now.
It is encouraging to hear that the brightness range will develope as the speakers break in, so I will refrain from further comments on this aspect of the 2000s until more time has passed.
BTW, for those of you with uneven floors, like me, I spoke to the Sound Anchors folks yestersday. For about $280, they will custom make a pair of their cradle bases for my 2000s. These will have a 3-point adjustable spike arrangement, allowing me to get them perfectly level and hieght-even with each another. They even will make the sides of the cradle base low enough not to block the vent above the plinth on the 2000s. I know Ohm feels this kind of setup is not required for Ohm Walsh designs, but it's the only way to keep my 2000s from wobbling and keep them straight. I can't imagine they will do any harm. |
It's difficult to compare the Walsh 5000's and Blue Circle solid state integrated with the 5000's and the McCormack DNA-500/ VTL preamp. The tube VTL preamp makes a difference in the presentation of the 5000 speakers. There is a new depth to the sound now, especially horns, and I listen to mostly classic jazz of the hard bop variety. My new setup has also taken away any high end grain I heard ocassionally with the BC integrated. In fact, I would say that the sound I hear now from the 5000's is the smoothest ever. So I will say that compared to the solid state Blue Circle integrated, the DNA-500, VTL 2.5 is more smooth in the upper mid range and highs but still very extended. The low end and mid bass too has more presence at higher and lower volumes, but the current and wattage of the DNA-500 should and does account for that. The affect of the Avalon parametric eq has to be taken into account also. I would say the DNA-500/VTL/ 5000 combination is not as crisp sounding as with the Blue Circle integrated I previoiusly used. The DNA-500/VTL combination provides more sonic weight and impact to the music however. That's as much of a comparsion as I can make. |
Hey Guys,
I took the plunge! I'll be selling the Unico integrated amp on Audiogon and I bought a new-in-box Bel Canto S300 power amp here at a great price. :-)
By the way, John Strohbeen (I called today) said that his rule is "the more power the better, which is not the same as 'the louder the better.'" :-) He also said that in order to hear a real difference, he recommended tripling the wattage into 6 ohms from where you are now. So, in my case, with an amp that puts out 80 watts into 8 ohms, I'd want an amp that does around 240 watts into 6 ohms. The S300, at around 225 watts/channel at 6 ohms should do it.
Now I'll need a pre-amp in the $500 to $700 (used) range. Any suggestions regarding what I should be on the lookout for will be welcome. Tubes? SS? What do you think?
Bondmanp,
Ditto what others have said about the Walsh treble. I'm not sure exactly how many hours my 100's have on them, but after 6-8 months of ownership, they're really starting to bloom beautifully, and the highs sound anything but recessed... "just right" would be more like it. I'm very pleased! |
REbbi, Nice move! I am very confident you will hear a difference.
3X power increase to hear a real difference based on power alne sounds about right.
My old Carver m4.0t amp that preceeded the MF A3CR was over 300 watts, about 3X that of the A3CR I replaced it with, but nt high current. It could shake the rafters at higher volumes, but was thin sounding at lower volumes. The A3CR cannot shake rafters at any volume, but sounds very solid at all volumes.
If you report back on the Bel CAnto positively, I may finally no longer be able to resist the urge to move back up to not just a more powerful but also juicier amp, Bel Canto or Wyred Class Ds, or bigger MF perhaps. I really do like the sound of the A3CR in my current system...it is hard to fault. More of the same would be just fine with me. Bryston is another possibility. The McCormack that Foster is using now is very appealing also but would cost a nice premium over the Class Ds I think. |
Oh, and Rebbi, I vote tube pre for you for certain. VTL, DHavilland, ARC or Juicy would be the ones I would look for .
You might want to pay special attention to pre-amp output impedance specs relative to the Bel Cant input impedance as a potential indicator of general compatibility for best sound. You want the pre output impedance to be a good bit lower than the amp input impedance in general. |
Mapman,
Thanks for the advice. From what I've seen so far, those preamp brands will bust my budget, but I'll keep an eye out.
The S300 was kind of a steal (by the crazy standards of high-end audio): 1/2 off retail, new in box! |
"those preamp brands will bust my budget"
Juicy should come in well under $1000 especially since you already have the phono pre-amp. Juicy is a stylistic challenge for some, but the best bargain in a tube pre-amp that I know of.
The others will likely come in on the flip side of $1000 somewhere I would guess.
In your price range, I'd be careful about SS pre-amps given that you are used to the Unico hybrid integrated. The Classe pre-amps or the Musical FIdelity A3CR pre-amp were my two leading contenders, but I decided to try the tube pre-amp plunge and have not regretted it. |
Rebbi, I concur with Mapman that you would do well to consider a tube preamp. VTL is one to look at. If one becomes available, a VTL 2.5 will be under $1k. Tubes have added a naturalness and "realness" to instruments in the jazz I listen to. |
Rebbe, another "pre-amp" that popped into my mind that might be worth considering is the PeachTree Decco. These can be had for under $500. It is a well reviewed (low power) hybrid integrated with tube DAC actually, but I'm thinking (not sure though) it might be used as a pre-amp only if desired. You would use digital out from your CD player (assuming that exists also) into the Decco. Phono would connect same as any other pre-amp. IF my assumptions are true, themn this would be the least expensive "high end" pre-amp solution I can think of. |
Here's info on the Decco:
http://www.stereomojo.com/PeachTree%20Decco%20Review/PeachTreeDeccoReview.htm
I see the pre-amp out jacks on the rear photo, so I think this could work. |
Rebbi - I also vote tube preamp. My C-J PV-11 mates well with my Odyssey Audio SS power amp. You might be able to find a nice C-J PV-5, 6, 11 or 12 within your budget. Look for one with a phono stage if you can find it. The MM phono stage in my PV-11 is very good. Other brands in your price range, used, are Rogue, ARC, and Audible Illusions.
IMHO, if you can't afford something decent right now, buy a cheep SS pre used (NAD, Rotel, etc.) as a place holder, and sell it when you have more cash for a better tube preamp. |
Bondmanp:
Somebody's got a Rogue Metis up for sale at around $700 right now. Any thoughts? |
