What Solid State PreAmp?

As to those persons running a Mcintosh 402 - what preamp are you currently using ? Has anyone tried a C45 or C46 and, if so, what are the results and any comment as to the differences between the 2 (i.e. any advantage to spending the extra $ for the 46) ?

The c46 8-band eq highest control is centered on 4kHz. So if you need to roll off 10~20kHz highs, it isn't going to work well for that. Download the manual to see the eq curves. The c46 eq is more for fixing specific bumps in rooom acoustics.

Most of your room EQ is below 300Hz. 4kHz is actually quite high and useful for attenuating the hard edge of poor CDs or system shortcomings. Of course, anyone spending the money on a Mc-system would generally spend equivalent money on sources, ICs and cables to have a truly resolving system, not needing high frequency EQ, but some people DO like to mess with this.

Dave

Dave,

Getting back to the thread late, you obviously have a point that tube-rolling has questionable merit depending on your PoV and what's intended.

There are really two motivations: system tuning and better sonics overall.

The first case is a matter of practicality - everything is colored and putting together a completely neutral system from the get-go (or not if that's not what you want) is not all that likely. So you tune - with tubes, cables, etc. In this case, the manufacturer obviously can't pick the correct tubes.

The second case applies to tubes of certain types and variants that simply sound superior to all ears, or at least have certain standout qualities. In these cases, the maker often *could* provide "the best" or at least better-than-chinese-stock tubes and sometimes why they don't is a slight mystery. (Cost and availability are obviously the answers..)

However, it is not true that tube-rolling is always an option: it flat-out isn't with my Shindo preamp. Shindo-san owns essentially all of the signal tubes of this type there are, from what I understand, and there is really only one variant as well. To your point, he *does* very specifically voice the unit to sound as good as he possibly can, and he don't want nobody screwing with those tubes. In this sense, these unit are no different from a SS counterpart at all. Since they do use tubes, which are naturally far more linear devices than transistors (except JFets??), their circuits are simpler, parts count lower, and heck if the best sounding pres don't all seem to be valved.

Paulfolbrecht said:

"heck if the best sounding pres don't all seem to be valved."

Except, of course, Rowland.

Have fun playing with your tubes... ;-)

Dave

Most of your room EQ is below 300Hz. 4kHz is actually quite high and useful for attenuating the hard edge of poor CDs or system shortcomings.[...]

For many CDs, program equalization is needed. The 4Khz band on the c46 can be turned down all day long and the harsh highs remain on a rceording. For example some some well thought of Steely Dan CDs are that way.

The local dealer has all the highest-send Mc sources, cables, power conditioners, etc. A good recording sounds great. OTOH ones with compression and boosted highs aren't fixed by playing around with the 4Khz -band equalizer on the c-46. Of course it's personal preference.

Others want a boomin' bass and searing highs. Coming from pre-digital audio of the 60s, 70s and early 80s, many of today's recordings are most unpleasant sounding to these 47 y.o. ears. Maybe that's why Mc makes for example the c45 and c2300 with standard treble controls (that roll off from the top). YMMV.

My MC402 fixed 90% of the issues I had with many recordings. I'd like to go ahead and get a preamp for the tone control and for voltage matching purposes.

Maybe Atmaspere's tube amps do even better with the highs as he claimed. I would like to audition one but no dealers around the state. And still the price is on up there.

As far as purity, accuracy, shortest signal path, I gave up on making that the endgame. Spent way too much time and $$$ on that. I simply want something that sounds good.

You'll never fix a bad recording with EQ. I just stay away from them. The vinyl and SACDs of Steely Dan are fantastic.

Dave

For the most part, I agree with Dcstep. That is, once in a certain price range (ie, higher, say over $3K although to some that's not so high), the preamp should be voiced by the designer who knows what he's doing, and should have the guts to say, this is what it's supposed to sound like. A la Shindo above.

Now below some price gear is more, shall we say, flexible, in that budgetary constraints were applied in its design and build, and some amount of tube rolling and/or mods can be beneficial because well, the designer simply could not allocate those funds and still stay priced 'right'. A great example is the EE Minimax pre, which I have owned and enjoyed for some time now, although it does not get much play any more as I do own a nice SS pre over $3K, which is voiced just fine - for now.

Much of what Dcstep has stated above I am totally in agreement with, but am adding the thoughts above. It is IMO quite 'weak' of a designer of high end gear to say, well here is my best shot, but you amateurs can probably make it sound better. Of course no one said that, but some (like myself) interpret it that way when they admit this tweak and that tube will make this $5-10K preamp sound better.

What about the new Plinius Tautoro?

Pass Labs XP-20 should be in the list

This is high end audio. He has probably has 4 different preamps since then.

IF you can find one- The infinity fet preamp.

The $6k H2O Fire preamp should be auditioned. Nothing I have heard compares.

Buy the $1200 Innersound listed here and be done with it