• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Adcom or B&K preamp?

Vistance

Vistance

Super Member
So, I'm curious - given the choice for stereo use (Not surround) which would you go with: an Adcom GTP-400 preamp, Adcom GTP-502 preamp, or a B&K Reference 20 preamp?

I ask because I own both Adcom preamps and am thinking about buying the B&K to use instead - depending on how price negotiations could go something like $135-$145 for the B&K and I think it does have the remote. I know Adcom is pretty nice stuff and have always liked it - I've never owned or even seen anything B&K but do know they're a nice brand too. I know weight isn't everything, although it is a bit disconcerting that the B&K weighs 10 pounds to the GTP-400's 11.5 pounds and the GTP-502's 13.5 pounds especially considering all the extra things the B&K is supposed to do comparatively.

One negative in all of these except the GTP-400 - no phono section. Admittedly where I'm using this I don't have a record player currently and am not sure if I could ever put one in there because of limited space. I know the B&K was stupid expensive compared to the Adcom's though - the GTP-502 was something like $600 in '98 or so and the GTP-400 was $400 in '89-'92ish whereas the B&K was $2,500 in '00. But I just want the best quality for stereo sound. I'm not sure how much of the cost of the B&K was for those then high tech surround features and stuff and how much was straight out quality based or purely stereo sound based.

Would just like some other opinions on this - a nice thing of the B&K it has digital inputs so I can use digital out on my CD player. I would imagine the B&K has a nice D/A converter but I'm unfamiliar with it as my main D/A converter is my Denon receiver which uses Burr Brown DACs to my knowledge (Which sound good to me). But I'm not sure I'd even hear the difference between the D/A converters or not, sadly I haven't been able to distinctly pick equipment apart from others at least not distinctly. On a price comparison though, my Denon receiver was roughly $2,500 in '02 - kind of amazing to think that B&K is just a preamp and it cost that not but two years earlier...

What do you all think?
 
Register to hide this ad
That's an easy decision; I would go with the B&K preamp. It's quite a bit higher up the food chain than the Adcom. Also sounds like you're getting a very good deal on the B&K. When or if the time does come for a tt it's easy enough to add an outboard phono pre.
 
zebra03 said:
I have the Adcom tuner preamp . If it were me , I would go with the B&K .
Click to expand...

This is interesting. I once had an Adcom processor. Knowing what I now know I would buy anything but an Adcom. It was one of the biggest mistakes I ever made buying a piece of equipment.

....and if I were you I might look further than the B&K. I looked into some of their stuff some years ago. Didn't do much for me.
 
i agree that adcom preamps arent where i would go. i had a B&K pre/pro that was absolutely transparent and i bet the preamps are likewise.

as for adcom amps, now THERE is a good bargain. they will deliver whatever is put in. i have a 555II, and my friend had a 5800, 5400, and a 5500, ALL of which did very nicely into his martin logan reQuest speakers.
 
So what is it that is supposedly "bad" about Adcom preamps? Kind of heard it mentioned here and there but no one has flat out told me what is supposedly their weakness. Or saea, was your reference to Adcom in general? I like Adcom amps, I liked my GFA-5300 and I like this GFA-545 II as well. Adcom stuff is cosmetically appealing to me too (The black with smooth beveled edges) - not that I let that decide what I buy.
 
I have a couple of Adcom amps (5200 and 5300) and I had the 565 pre-amp. It wasn't cheap and got good reviews....but I didn't like it. It was my first dedicated pre-amp so at the time it was an improvement over what I had, but after hearing a few different ones in subsequent years I sold it. My biggest critique was that it was dull and lifeless. Regardless of the material, source component, or any setting (or omission) of tone controls it just sounded boring. That one was supposedly near the top of their line-up, so based on that I can't imagine the downstream models don't interest me. I do think the amps are very good for the price, but I would look elsewhere for a pre-amp.
 
There is nothing wrong with the GTP 400. It is a very clean unit with low noise and very flat freq response.
 
i bought a gfp565 paired with a gfa555II and thought it was pretty good until i tried a used arc sp3a1 which completely floored it. the improvement was so distinct that i could not believe my ears. the stereophile review was way off base but the unit wasnt horrible or anything, just good.

i wouldnt hesitate to say that the B&K pre/pro i had EASILY outclasses the 565 in transparency. my quatre bod1c was also notably better sounding as well. my 565 is for sale as my daughter no longer is using it and i cant see using it as a primary preamp in my system again. nothing WRONG with it, it just doesnt hold a candle to the sp3a1. i would seek out a sp9 or sp6c before considering going back to the 565.

as stated before, the amplifiers are another story altogether. i am keeping my 555II.
 
I hold respect for Adcom gear.

Personally, I chose B&K, but that was preference and synergy for my system.

That's a fine price on the B&K pre-amp.
 
Tried a new Adcom GFP-555 a while back. It wasn't offensive or bad. It was just sort of blah. If you have forward sounding speakers it would probably be a good match. Sold it to a friend to help finance the purchase of an ARC SP-9. I've still got the SP-9. I have a GTP-450 paired with a GFA-535 in my bedroom. Having a remote for the bedroom is a plus. The combo sounds OK for a non critical environment. Like some other posters, I think Adcom power amps are generally better than the preamps.
I have heard a GFP-585 and it is a much more impressive unit. I though it sounded very good. It didn't sound anything like other Adcom preamps.
 
Vistance said:
So what is it that is supposedly "bad" about Adcom preamps? Kind of heard it mentioned here and there but no one has flat out told me what is supposedly their weakness. Or saea, was your reference to Adcom in general? I like Adcom amps, I liked my GFA-5300 and I like this GFA-545 II as well. Adcom stuff is cosmetically appealing to me too (The black with smooth beveled edges) - not that I let that decide what I buy.
Click to expand...

No, just my experience with the processor. It was poorly engineered and troublesome. I didn't have it two months and it failed catastrophically nearly damaging other components. I was given a second one that failed in the same manner. These are brand new units purchased at a dealer mind you.

I've been at this a long time and I have never seen a pre amp fail to the point of actually burning up. So...I do not hold a place in my heart for Adcom.

I will say though that I used to drive my center channel with an Adcom power amp that was decent. But now it too has been taken out of service.
 
Hmm, well for all the contempt Adcom generates I still like their stuff. I've never heard of anything so ridiculous as a preamp breaking other equipment, both of my Adcom preamps are fine. The sorry Pioneer receiver I had was more of a danger to my speakers than anything I've ever owned - what with its habit of just going up up up on the volume if you didn't use the remote. I'd definitely buy more Adcom preamps if I got a deal on them, but that's anything I buy really. Maybe not the most esoteric preamps but they're not junk.
 
Well I really like Adcom gear but I'd have to go with the B&K given that choice. I like Adcom's preamps and power amps but the preamp-tuner combo kind of limits the flexibility of having separates a bit. Why be stuck with the Adcom tuner when you can have just a pre-amp and go with a different (and probably much better) tuner?

Also, as much as I like and respect Adcom gear I would think that the B&K outperforms the Adcom, plus it sounds like you are getting a really great deal. You could always sell the B&K if you don't like it, take that money and buy a nice GFP-555II later on.
 
Vistance said:
So what is it that is supposedly "bad" about Adcom preamps? Kind of heard it mentioned here and there but no one has flat out told me what is supposedly their weakness.
Click to expand...

I once owned the GFP-555 and GTP-555II preamp/processor. Both were a bit bland sounding to my ears, and noisy with the volume at zero. When I called Adcom to complain about the noise, I was told it must be because of my speakers' highish sensitivity and to just use the preamp in bypass mode. WTF ? A few years later, I though I would give Adcom another chance when I needed a budget priced preamp/surround processor and bought the GTP-555II. That had audible center channel noise in surround mode. I've also owned the B&K Pro-5 and MC-101 Sonata. The Pro-5 to my ears was nothing special, but the MC-101 was a different cup of tea -- sweet, smooth, lively, grain-free sounding, and most of all very quiet. It took the purchase of a Classé preamp twice the price of the MC-101 to better it.
 
Last edited:
I have an Adcom amp and pre-amp (see signature) and neither are very inspiring.

They're adequate at best, but my old Rotel 870 pre-amp sounded better and I'm sure my MC2205 amp will beat the Adcom amp (if and when it ever arrives....).
 
Well, it doesn't matter anymore - the guy with the B&K has decided to just stop communicating with me so now I have no option but to keep on using my GTP-400. God knows when I'll ever see another preamp on Craigslist - seems they're never on there and if they are they're some $800 preamp way out of my budget for this purpose...hmph, oh well I guess. Can't do anything more about it now...
 
Just to throw another choice out there you might want to consider a similar vintage NAD monitor series pre-amp such as the 1700.
Check out this article in the NY Times comparing the NAD and the Adcom 400.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/09/24/arts/sound-active-speakers-have-their-needs.html
I had an Adcom for a little while and liked it a lot, but went with the NAD ultimately because it really has a VERY nice phono stage, with both MM and MC settings.
For what its worth, a close friend has B&K components and they sound great!
Good luck and happy hunting!
Cheers,
Ray
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom