2. amps-preamps
  3. 151090-1475

Music Reference RM-200

Was the original RM-200 rated class A or just the MK.2? I remember both of them being, but I want some validation, someone has questioned me rudely about it. Also, can you sub a ECC180 for the 6BQ7 driver tube in the amp? 

Thanks
enobenetto
enobenetto OP
67 posts
 
Thanks for the reply, but I should have clarified, I meant "Stereophile Class A" rated. 
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
9,510 posts
 

Ah, okay. I'm pretty sure the original went into Class A after it's review by Fremer, as did the MK.2 of course. I owned one of the originals, and asked Roger Modjeski about the improvements made in the Mk.2 version. Beside the capacitor forming circuit (suggested to him by Richard Vandersteen), Roger told me he reduced the amp's distortion at high frequencies in about half (!), made the circuit more linear in general, and improved the amp's power supply and output transformers. The original can be sent in and brought up to Mk.2 status in every way except for the capacitor forming capability.

You may be asking because of the new listing here on Audiogon of an original for $1500, a real good price. Even the original version puts to shame a number of higher-priced tube amps, those better known, better distributed, better advertised, and with more reviews. Brooks Berdan loved (RIP) Roger's stuff, but made a lot more money selling his customers Jadis and VTL. Brooks liked the RM-9 or RM-200 mated with Vandersteens, which made for a great moderately-priced system.

skipping
30 posts
 
Yes, the first version of the Music Reference RM-200 was reviewed in Stereophile’s April 2002 issue and rated "A"(tubes). I owned the amp for several years and saved the magazine. It excelled even more with upgraded KT-88 tubes. A very solid performer, but I have since sold it and down sized to solid state integrate.
I'm not sure about subbing the 6BQ7.  I would get in touch with tubeaudiostore.com and pose the question to them.
clio09
3,346 posts
 
The original can be sent in and brought up to Mk.2 status in every way except for the capacitor forming capability.

No it can't. I was never aware of the upgrade, Roger never speaks of it these days, and if they were done in the past they aren't going to be done any longer. We will continue to service RM-200s.

The 6BQ7A supplied by the Tube Audio Store are the correct driver tubes as they need to be aligned for offset which Roger does (and I will soon be doing) by hand. As for the output tubes, RAM KT-88 are stock, most folks like the Gold Lion KT-88, and my personal favorite is the GE 6550. Some people run KT-120, good luck with that.
enobenetto OP
67 posts
 
Thanks for the help and clarification. I thought both versions were rated class A. This other person thinks that it's only the mk2 version and he thinks I'm intentionally misleading. I'm sure they sound different but that doesn't mean they both are not great amps. Some times designers change the model for a different audience who uses different kinds of speakers or that they just want to try something new and experiment. At first, I did not like the mk1 model but then I spent more time with it and realized how good it was with the tone and timbre of instruments, as well as the balance of other qualities throughout the frequency spectrum. I wish it did have a little more damped bass, but everything has tradeoffs. I will call Ram Labs about the tube swap because I know that they are used in these amps in unique ways. 

Does anyone have suggestions for a good balanced tube preamp?  
More to discover