m85/c85 or tube amp

edwin

Active Member
has anyone done a comparison of an m85/c85 or any M series amps with a tube amp? Have no idea how a tube amp sounds and was wondering if going tubes would be a marked improvement. Thanks
 
There are about a million different tube amps which makes a comparison impossible. Some tube gear can be just as transparent and fast as SS while other is 'warm' and slow sounding.
 
I have owned most of the vintage Yamaha amps. They all have their pros and cons and preferences would totally depend on the speakers you are driving. I like the physical build quality of the M-4 and M-2 better than the M-xx series but the M-xx certainly are very clean strong performers. With all that said, I have owned more M-4 amps than any other Yamaha amp and it is the only one I still own. Yamaha amps and tube amps are two terms that probably should not be used in the same sentence.
 
SS Yamaha amps are notoriously "clinical", even compared to other SS amps by the likes of Sansui, Pioneer and Marantz, so they will likely be dramatically different than a tube amplifier. That said, it is all about what you prefer.
 
SS Yamaha amps are notoriously "clinical", even compared to other SS amps by the likes of Sansui, Pioneer and Marantz, so they will likely be dramatically different than a tube amplifier. That said, it is all about what you prefer.
Not all of them.
The the B-2 amps are very sweet sounding IMHO.
 
Have you ever tried any?
I refurb both of Edwins Yamaha pieces. I don't care to work on valves.I have no inspiration to start now. The last tubes I worked with were TWT's (RF " EW jamming" amplifiers )..

teledyne-twt-communications.jpg


I've replaced a shit load of these.
I repaired many B1 amps and B2 amps,not yamaha, but Northrop.
 
Last edited:
I havent tried any. Curious how it sounds compared to my yamahas before i decide on whether to go tubes or not. Happy and satisfied with my recapped amps and speakers though. Thanks.
 
Plenty of tube gear out there. Also plenty of people putting boutique
prices on tube gear. I have some entry level gear, the Mk 1 version of
http://www.osbornloudspeakers.com.au/cyber-800-ii

They sound ok but are slightly lacking in the area of slam and maybe bass.
I must admit I like the convience of SS and just flicking a switch.

Currently tinkering with a CX-1, CX-1000, C-70 and an M-70. The CX-1000 is
impressive, only a brief listen to the C-70 (relay problems?) and was
impressed by the "in room presence". The valve stuff is packed away for now.

My understanding is the C-85/M-85 are slightly better. Suggest you have a
good listen to some valve gear at the next hi-fi show in the area.
 
Plenty of tube gear out there. Also plenty of people putting boutique
prices on tube gear. I have some entry level gear, the Mk 1 version of
http://www.osbornloudspeakers.com.au/cyber-800-ii

They sound ok but are slightly lacking in the area of slam and maybe bass.
I must admit I like the convience of SS and just flicking a switch.

Currently tinkering with a CX-1, CX-1000, C-70 and an M-70. The CX-1000 is
impressive, only a brief listen to the C-70 (relay problems?) and was
impressed by the "in room presence". The valve stuff is packed away for now.

My understanding is the C-85/M-85 are slightly better. Suggest you have a
good listen to some valve gear at the next hi-fi show in the area.

I imagine that M-85 is probably a notch above the M-70 (had, have neither)
The CX-1000 is more than a notch above the C-85 (had a C-85; will never part from the CX-1000). The C-85, besides feeling like a thin can comparing to the CX-1000, has a floor noise way higher than that or the CX-1000. Otherwise, they are both transparent and good sounding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mbz
...The C-85, besides feeling like a thin can comparing to the CX-1000, has a floor noise way higher than that or the CX-1000. Otherwise, they are both transparent and good sounding.

Interesting, considering the specs that should easily define noise appear quite similar, if not the same. Perhaps the C-85 of comparison was not quite right.
 
I have the cx-800 and c-85 both recapped by avionic and comparing the two , i find the cx-800 thinner. I used the tone bypass function on both preamps.
 
Maybe straying off post. What I was trying to say is that the CX-1000 and C-70 appear quite decent and prefer that over the tube gear
mentioned (either consonance passive attenuator or aikido as preamp). Expect c-85/m-85 to be in same ballpark. Certainly there will
be better tube gear out there, you just need to find it and part with the asking $$$$'s. I would not rush and buy tube gear in hope since
there is a lot of junk out there.
 
I think i won’t rush going into tubes. Tried looking for a good tube technician in my area before i go into it but couldn’t find any. I will have a problem if something goes wrong. I guess ill just stick with my present SS set up now and enjoy it. Thanks
 
Interesting, considering the specs that should easily define noise appear quite similar, if not the same. Perhaps the C-85 of comparison was not quite right.
possibly, or maybe one was picking up line noise more than the other. I have not done a scientific study by any means but did tested them at the same location.
 
I think i won’t rush going into tubes. Tried looking for a good tube technician in my area before i go into it but couldn’t find any. I will have a problem if something goes wrong. I guess ill just stick with my present SS set up now and enjoy it. Thanks
Try a B-2. You will not be looking for a "sweet" sounding amp after that, tube or otherwise.
 
Saw one on the japanese auction site but am not sure if there are issues on the vfets. Couldnt take the risk. Thanks
 
Back
Top Bottom