I need the gangs help with this one..

But I realize from the beginning that this forum is going to be biased towards vintage gear. Im going to give it a shot anyway.

The subject of taking my HT setup and adding a dedicated 2 channel enviroment to it came up a few days ago. Since then it was determined that I need a passive preamp or an active preamp with a passive bypass or loop. Since then Ive done some research and found the preamp.

http://www.monolithicsound.com/pa-1.html

Seems to get great reviews, can be passive or active and would suit my needs perfectly and the matching phono preamp is supposed to be very nice.

Now comes the dillema.

Today I called a guy to get pricing on the PA-1 and he says used is $300 and I say "I'll take it" but he interjects and asks what amps Im running and what source. I give him the low down (ATI amps, Philips CDP and soon a Rega TT). He explains that the ATI amps are very powerful and clean but have that distinct "bright" solid state sound to them. He says he can make me an incredible deal on a vintage Conrad Johnson PV2A tube preamp. He says the phono preamp in it is better than the Rotel preamp that I bought (yet it wouldnt be better than the monolithic phono pre if I ended up buying it) and he says that it will "tame" my bright system. It doesnt have a passive input but the solution to that is to put the gain control at 12 o'clock and calibrate my HT setup. Then whenever I switch to HT mode, just be sure to turn the gain control back to 12 o'clock. He quoted me a price of $290 and I saw one other on Audiogon for $200, so he may be willing to go down a few $$ (or I could get the one off Audigon).

Just wanted some feedback here before I make a decision. I havent finalized my speaker purchase yet so I can always "tame" the brightness by buying a non metal domed speaker. Im looking at both options being about the same price, but if I go the CJ way I can sell my Rotel pre and that takes the price of the CJ down $100.

Tim

P.S. Since Ive opened up a can of worms with this one, any other tube preamp or passive preamps options under $500 are welcomed. I saw a CJ PV7 for $400 somewhere.

P.S.S. Link to the CJ PV2A

http://www.conradjohnson.com/It_just_sounds_right/a-PV2.html

P.S.S.S Found this link on Ebay for a PV2 (not PV2a, but same thing) offers better pics.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1391924979
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SJH
Tim, the gentlemen said "tame your bright system", what do you say, is it "bright"? Don't know if I'd go running around looking for solutions to problems that don't exist. I prefer tubes but realize others enjoy SS and that THAT device does not have to sound bright. I'm not familiar with your amps. My advice, which doesn't address the specifics, is to ask if you're happy with your amp? If not then I'd consider upgrading it rather than band-aiding it with a "warm" preamp. I'd do this, find the amp you like and then get the F.T. Audio LW-1 passive ($500). I ran that combo for a few years with a VAC triode EL-34 based amp with very good results. The VAC was on the romantic side of things (less so than the CJ) and the LW-1 very neutral, transparent and revealing - allowing the system and vintage tubes in the amp to be showcased. Can't say I'd recommend an older CJ preamp, as they are pleasant sounding but too colored for my liking.

MikE
 
Last edited:
Hi, Tim,
I agree with MikE on your situation, and that is from my perspective as a SS guy.
Have YOU decided your system is "bright"?

The Adcom SLC-1 passive control amp comes up on eBay, and is a nice little unit, and can be had for a fair price.

pete
 
Tim,
wonder about this preamp on Audiogon. A Wright Audio that has the HT pass through AND tubes. Certainly not a big name like CJ, AND the particular model has been discontinued.

"WRIGHT AUDIO LT-4 Tube Preamp
Opening Bid $275.00
Item Description
The LT-4 preamp has 2 12AX7 and 1 12AT7 tubes and a separate power supply which has been beefed up by Musical Concepts. Musical Concepts has, also, performed a parts upgrade on the preamp. This is the sixth iteration of this preamp offered by Wright Audio.

The preamp has a home theater pass through, bass and treble controls which operate below 100 cycles and above 10,000 cycles, separate left and right gain controls which essentially are removed from the circuit when operated at full gain. The individual left and right gain controls feed a very high quality (TKD installed by Musical Concepts) master stereo volume control.

Wright Audio offers the PH-2 phono stage which can be operated from the LT-4's power supply. "

Not really a recommendation (since I haven't heard it) but at least something to think about. BTW, this is Wright AUDIO; there's also a Wright Sound that has gotten alotta press/rep from their $750 phono pre.
TY
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the replies guys.

Tonto , I found a picture of the pramp and power supply here

http://www.wrightaudio.com/lt4_preamplifier.htm

Looks very nice but I have a feeling this thing is going to close way over what Im willing to spend.

Im going to watch it and see if it goes over $500. If it does, Im going to grab up the Monlithic Passive/Active pre and give it whirl. I may find I like how it sounds in passive mode and be happy. If it sounds better in active mode but I find its a bit bright, then Ill know for sure that a tube preamp is the way I want to go.

Thanks for the link to the Wright preamp though, will be fun t try and win it.

Tim
 
Funny thing, I called Wright Audio to inquire about the LT-4, and the knew of the exact LT-4 that was on Audiogon. The original LT-4 didnt have an HT pass through, the story goes the guy bought this unit and wasnt happy with it so he sent it off to have it modified. One of the mods included the HT pass through. Apparently something went wrong with the mods and he then sent it back to Wright Audio for repair who fixed whatever was wrong with it but couldnt get it back to "factory" because all the caps had been replaced and some other stuff. They sent it back to the guy and he claimed he was happy but now a month later its up on Audiogon. makes you wonder. He probably put over $500 into mods on that pre and still isnt happy and the stock unit probably sounded better. The guys at Wright Audio said after repairing it they listened to it for a few minutes and while it osunded ok, they thought it lost some of its original detail and this was probably due to the new caps.
 
Just curious, you never did answer the question about if you thought your system was "bright".

Perhaps I'm wrong, but it sounds like from your posts you are listening to everyone else's advice rather than your own ears and it sounds like that will be really costing you. It has up until now too as I recall our conversation in chat.

I guess the question to you is, what do you think of your system? To hell with what everyone else tells you.

To quote you from another post:

What does a good setup sound like? I wasnt happy with the HTIaB but at the same time Ive heard some $$$$ HT setups in audio shops that I also didnt care for. Im learning very quickly that what sounds good to one person can sound like crap to another, my example of this is that i think Martin Logans sound like crap but the dealer I heard them at thought they were the bees knee.

......always remember, the most important judge of a component is the one who uses it.
 
I didnt answer because honestly Im not sure. I only have a single pair of bookshelves as speakers right now. Im in the building phase and speakers are my last option (I probably did this ass backwards I know). The bookshelves I choose use a big silk dome tweeter and this was done on purpose because I definately DIDNT want a bright sounding speaker. Im still debating my majr speaker purchase and Ive yet to find anything I really like. I did like the Energy Veritas speakers. they were VERY detailed, but forthe short time I had them in my house the highs became harsh after less than an hour. Was this the speakers tweeter or was it my system? I dont know and Im not even sure how to tell.
 
Hi Tim,

I don't think you have things "ass-backwards".

I tend to follow the British dictum of source components first rather than the speakers first approach.

Afterall no matter how good your speakers if your source is crap then that's what you are going to get out of the speaker.

Garbage In, Garbage Out.

IME what comes before the speakers has more effect on the sound. I find a system with a really good front end is much more enjoyable than great speakers and mediocre front end.


As to your preamp adventures, what happened to the Sony TA-P9000ES ?

From your earlier posts I thought you were looking for a multi-channel analog preamp ?

I'm not a great fan of current Energy's.
The big Veritas (2.8?) I've heard were very sensitive to what was in front of them and with a mismatched system could indeed be rapidly fatiguing.


cheerio
 
Originally posted by michael w


Afterall no matter how good your speakers if your source is crap then that's what you are going to get out of the speaker.

Garbage In, Garbage Out.

This is not a valid analogy. Speakers have as much as two orders of magnitude (100x) more distortion compared to the very cheapest digital front end and a frequency response with 10 times the variance from neutral. Not to mention, that only a few of the highest end speakers can even reproduce the full audible bandwitdh and have a dynamic range of the recorded source.

In other words - take a pristine source signal and dump garbage all over it, it becomes garbage.
 
Last edited:
Well I guess that it depends on what school of thought youre from. I just figured getting my components together first and "settling" for a mediocre speaker woud be the best way to go. Once Ive got the front end setup I can move to the speakers. Ofcourse the downside to this is it will require a lot of IN HOUSE speaker testing to see what sounds good with the equipment you invested in. Guess you cant win for losing.

As to the Sony TA-P9000ES, I coudnt find ANY used and nw they were $500 shipped. I can get the Monolithic unit which will do everything the Sony will do (except have a remote) for $315 shipped and an resell it for that and maybe even make some $$ if Im not happy with it.
 
I would never tell someone how assemble their system (I can certainly offer opinions). Whatever makes you happy. However, I do disagree with the blanket assertion that the source has more infuence on the quality of reproduced sound than speakers. The improvement in accuracy between a $500 pair of well engineered speakers and a $2000 pair of well engineered speakers is many times greater than the variance between a $79 dollar CD Walkman and a $20,000 Linn CD player.
 
Last edited:
Forget source...

What about amplification? For me the most important component is the amplification device, and for my money it's got to me tube. I've heard many speakers I could live with, of all different configurations; planar, dynamic, horns, but I've always been happiest with tubes, not curcuit boards, in the system. Valve amplification, especially SET, conveys the essense or emotion of the music, whereas speakers effect the presentation. Which is a mightly important parameter. The one is more about effect and the other about feelings. Only valve technology seems capable of doing that for me. There's an interesting thread on AA, that touches on this subject>

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/set/messages/22358.html

MikE
 
Interesting theorys, but as a tech and hi-fi- junkie, it is the [/i]transducers[/i] that matter. The point where a mechanical signal becomes and electrical one (cartridge), or where an electrical signal becomes a mechanical one (speaker).

I've spent 5x more on my speakers then any other portion on my system, and the rewards are apparent (to me).
 
Interesting third approach Mike

:)

There's a fourth contender too.
I've just read in the latest TAS that there's an internet audio guru who on his website proclaims that no system is serious unless you have spent at least half your budget on cables !

LMAO !

:p:



Hi Don,

I follow what you are saying however the performance of the speaker is still at the mercy of the components that precede it.

IME plonking very good speakers on the end of a so-so system can open the window too wide and expose flaws in the system whereas investing more in the front end and amp and using lesser speakers may prove more enjoyable when the source and amp is not the limiting factor.

This was first shown to me back in 1986 when none other than Charlie Brennen of Linn (Ivor's right hand man at the time) was in town to demonstrate Linn audio to local audiophiles.

In demonstrating he had setup two systems.
One had a Rega/Naim front end into Linn Isobarik speakers.
The other used a Linn LP12/Naim into little Linn Kan speakers.

In both systems the Naim amp was the same.

A poll of listeners clearly favored the system with the lesser speakers.


These two approaches seem to echo the different emphasis given to parts of the audio system on each side of the Atlantic.

In the past the British companies like Linn and Naim have concerntrated on the front end and American companies had been concerntrating on amplifiers and speakers.


cheerio
 
Originally posted by michael w
Hi Don,

I follow what you are saying however the performance of the speaker is still at the mercy of the components that precede it.

IME plonking very good speakers on the end of a so-so system can open the window too wide and expose flaws in the system whereas investing more in the front end and amp and using lesser speakers may prove more enjoyable when the source and amp is not the limiting factor.


This was my thinking and this was also why I choose to work things in the way I did. Obviously, as I mentioned before, you run into problems later on when it comes time to find the right speakers for yoru setup, but maybe that in itself is easier than trying to find the right electronics for speakers you pick out in the beginning. ESPECIALLY since the speakers you thought you loved have now changed so much after you upgraded your front end.
 
Hi Mike

It is not my intent to disuade you from your preferences. However, I still have problems with the generalization, that speakers, because they are at the end of the chain, are less important than what is at the front. By any objective analysis, the weakest link is the governing factor and speakers are the weakest link.

You stated that inexpensive speakers mask the front end flaws that an expensive speaker would otherwise expose. This is another way of stating that the source errors tend to be errors of commission and that the speaker errors tend to be errors of omission. The argument being that errors of commission (such as adding distortion) are much more objectionable than errors of omission (such as a speaker lacking midrange resolution).

The problem is that this argument is not valid. Speakers commit far more gross errors than any other component regardless of what they omit. They put out higher levels of distortion than any current digital front end. By virtually every measure, inexpensive speakers will be adding many more times the levels of inaccurate artifacts to the signal than the front end. Expensive speakers can mitigate these artifacts and distortion by an order of magnitude. There is no level of spending on a digital front end that will result in a measurable order of magnitude improvement.

If the majority of your listening is LP's, there is a stronger case for emphais on the front end. However, even then, my preference would be to spend more on speakers. To me, the diferences between a $700 Rega Planar 3 and a $70,000 Rockport Sirus aren't even in the same league as the difference between any $700 speaker you care to name and a $12,000 pair of Revel Utima Salon's.

No $700 speakers can come close to the dynamic response of the Revels. Take away dynamics, and I feel you have stripped the emotion from the music. Every $700 pair of speakers I have ever seen will have no bass compared to near 20hz response of the Revels. In terms of linear response, freedom from distortion and dynamic compression, there is no $700 speaker that would compare.

Finally, I can't agree with your assessment that there is a British approach to system design that emphasizes front end over speakers. Here in Canada, I regularly get access to such British magazines as What-Hi-Fi and HFNR. I have not perceived any such cultural agreement on that approach.

I can't comment on Naim, since I don't know enough of their background. However I do know a fair bit about Linn and would be absolutely shocked if their position was any different. They are a small niche company that made their name on the LP12. Speakers were an afterthought and have nowhere near the market acceptance of their front end components. You sell on your strengths.

In comparision, I'm positive that the largest high-end speaker company in the world (British based B&W) would give you a strong counter argument. Not to mention KEF, Tannoy, Mission etc.

To end, let me further extend the garbage analogy - quite possibly beyond the point of relevancy :)

Consider a rose as being analagous to the source signal. Cover it in garbage that is ten times as pungent. My guess is that all you will smell is the garbage.
 
Last edited:
Tim,
Just a thought getting back to the source of this thread is have you given thought to using an old reciever like a Marantz or Sansui to use the preamp section? It won't break the bank and will keep you in the SS end of things while you think about the direction you want to go.
I have a real mishmash of gear and also have the time to get out and listen quite a bit. So I listen to a lot of different things including the mass market low ball stuff at the local discount chain stores.
All I can in all honesty tell you that the only test that really counts is getting it into your space and living with it. Taking your own music with you to listen to is very important when out and about but nothing will come close to your own environment.
To tube or not to tube. Watts are the question. If you see yourself buying some good speakers made today that are not made with tube gear in mind then you should stick with your amp and possibly stay away from tubes. Tubes are way fun and if you start down that road you might end up going all the way.
The only reason I mention this is that there are a lot of very good speakers out there that demand the watts most easily delivered by SS.
An example is I brought home a pair of medium grade SE amps for a long visit and loved them. The next person that got the amps didn't like them because there just wasn't enough power to get through the crossover network (I don't remember the brand, just about the SPL and xovers). The other guys speaks were rated with an SPL higher than mine I was told, but the complex crossovers just took too much of the power that there wasn't enough left to drive the speakers hard enough. Good speakers, good amps but not together.
I am curious and like to try lots of things and doubt I will ever stop replacing, trading in and out of speakers and amps etc as long as I can buy, build, borrow or my hearing goes.
Have a good time hunting and keep us posted
 
Hi Don,

Guess we disagree on which end of the system is more important.
No problem.

Ideally of course, each part of the system should be given equal resources, however the reality is that often that is not possible.

IME both approaches can produce satisfying results.


With regard to my "British approach" comment, it was prefaced with "In the past...".

Back in the late 70s/early 80s when Linn was in their ascendency they started the entire hierachial approach to audio system building. This concept was supported by the audio press at the time...Hi Fi News, Hi Fi Answers, Practical Hi-Fi, Hi Fi- Choice.

It was around the mid-80s when fledgling company Absolute Sounds introduced to the British buyer exotica like Audio Research and Krell amplifiers, Magnepan and Martin Logan speakers.

This marked a turning point for audio in the UK and was the catalyst to a new approach to hi fi.


Linn have always been involved in speakers.
As far back as 1976 they were developing the beginnings of the mighty Linn/Naim PMS active systems.

And get ready for a shock....Linn still hold true to the concept of a hi-fi hierachy.

http://www.linn.co.uk/spec_sound/hifi_hierarchy.cfm



Cheerio


;)
 
Back
Top Bottom