Opinions on deHavilland Mercury 2

Hi Artg,
Sorry for the delay, I having been around this site for awhile. I auditioned the Mercury 2 for a couple of weeks and sent it back due to a mismatch with my power amp.

The Mercury left a big impression on me. The soundstage is huge and the midrange incredibly extended. Their lower frequencies are not as good as the highs or midrange though.

After that i tried the Eastern Electric MM for 30 days and kept it. The EE is a very nice unit that really sings at that price range.

Audiogabby - Any news on your preamp search?

I was the one who tried it, and have stated again and again, i think it might have been a mismatch with my Berning ZH270 amp. Based on how well the thing was put together, and how good Kara and company are, I am not in the least bit suprised (and am generally very glad to hear) that it works very well in others' systems!

Slingshot. I have the UltraVerve and it is great with my Carissa. Keep us posted on the Mercury and the PX-25.

Cheers

Sheffb, I just sold the Pass Labs X-1 to raise cash to buy the Mercury. I think the circuit is very similar or identical to the 2.5. That is one of the main reasons I thought it would improve my system given your experience with it. Also Dick Osher's review of the UltraVerve was sensational and presumably the Mercury would be better. The person referenced stated he tried in in three different system without sucess. It would seem perfect for my Art Audio PX-25.

Thanks guys. I have a Mercury 2 coming my way. It's a brand new unit so it's going to take a few days before posting my impresions.

Slingshot, One of the characteristics of the Mercury which makes it so nonfatiguing and natural is the lack of edge and any spectacular "electronic sound". It does require some break-in and after break-in sounds best after about an hour warm up. You, probably know all this. I suspect the customer who who sent it back had a component mismatch or was looking for a more upfront sound. I am sure it is more complicated then that. AC line conditioning, isolation, "wires" all make a difference. I must admit, I have never heard lifeless or dull sound coming through the Mercury. I understand however the Mercury 2 improvements were Kara's attempt to add a little more life to the sound, but told me in an email not to upgrade since I was so happy. I previously used the Pass 2.5 which is an excellent very neutral preamp and highly recommended. The Mercury however goes beyond in harmonic accuracy and timbre. I find the images more true to life with more bloom. This is a fun hobby. I am glad my system however is at a point I can just sit back and listen, thinking more about the performance and adding music to my collection.

Sheffb, It is nice to hear you still like it. I have one on order. Someone else here had it and sent it back. Said it sounded lifeless and dull.

I also have a Mercury 1. I've had it for several months and think its great. It does image very well and helps project a huge soundstage. I have it in my main system and have moved my Bat vk5i upstairs. It's one "musical" piece of equipment. Give it a try.
Rudge

I have had the deHavilland Mercury for 7 months and it may be the most satisfying new component in my 40 years of audiophile indulgence. The Mercury 2 can only sound better because Kara would only make a change for the better! In brief the Mercury sounds real, real, real! Very nonfatiguing, full bodied, solid imaging, accurate timbre and in my sytem, no shortcomings. It just plain passes the music. I love jazz and opera and most of the time I am transported to the live performance. This has to be one of the best values in state of the art components. The tubes are way under stressed and probably last 10,000 hours, also cheap to replace!