Yamaha CX-1 vs. C-50 preamps

[steelglam]

I have a Yamaha CX-1 preamp that I have very few complaints about, save for two:

1.) No mono switch
2.) No switchable capacitance and resistance in the phono stage

I just came across a C-50 for a reasonable price and am wondering if anyone knows how it compares sound-wise to the CX-1. I like that it has the more extensive feature set compared to the CX-1, but I'm not sure how the two compare sound-wise. And that includes the phono stage: despite having more features in the phono stage than the CX-1, does the C-50's phono stage have superior sound? I notice that the C-50 is a lot older than the CX-1.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts!

 

[ryuuoh]

I have a C-50, but I haven't listened to the phono extensively. I believe there's been discussion on this board comparing the C-50 to other Yamaha preamps.
One thing this series of gear has a problem with is cold or broken solder joints. Easily fixed, but something to be aware of.

 

[steelglam]

I have a C-50, but I haven't listened to the phono extensively. I believe there's been discussion on this board comparing the C-50 to other Yamaha preamps.
One thing this series of gear has a problem with is cold or broken solder joints. Easily fixed, but something to be aware of.

Yeah, I had that solder joint problem with my CX-1 as well. Seems like a common problem with these Yamaha pre's.

I'm mainly interested in how the sound quality of the phono stages in these two preamps compare to one another. And that is simply because the CX-1 does not have as much functionality as the C-50 in that department. I like to play around with alternative cartridge loadings. I've considered modding the stock input loadings on the CX-1 and using parallel resistive/capacitive plugs to achieve the same end (though it's not as straightforward to do so for capacitance specifically because there is a choke in the circuit). But if the C-50's phono stage has superior sound, I'd consider picking it up instead.

Maybe a better question to ask is how the C-50 compares sound-wise to the Apt Holman preamp--the other preamp that I am using--since the Apt has all of the phono functionality that I like.

 

[Dr. Ear]

I have both preamps. The CX-1 has a decent phono stage with adjustable input impedance for MC cartridges (220 & 1000 Ohm) which is much more practical for modern MC cartridges than the 100 Ohm of the C-50. There were two versions of the C-50, one had different settings for MM input capacitance, the other one had 3 settings for MM input impedance only. IMHO both models sound rather similar.

 

[steelglam]

I have both preamps. The CX-1 has a decent phono stage with adjustable input impedance for MC cartridges (220 & 1000 Ohm) which is much more practical for modern MC cartridges than the 100 Ohm of the C-50. There were two versions of the C-50, one had different settings for MM input capacitance, the other one had 3 settings for MM input impedance only. IMHO both models sound rather similar.

Thanks, Dr. Ear. The C-50 I found is the one that has the multiple capacitance settings.

I'd really like to mod the CX-1 so that the MM input capacitance is low (around 50pf) and the impedance higher (100k), so that I can use parallel capacitive and resistive plugs to raise the capacitance and lower the resistance as necessary to match whatever cartridge I am running at the time. This would forego the need of having a phono stage with multiple capacitance/resistance settings built in. Not sure how easy it will be to mod the CX-1, however. On the schematic, I can't seem to find the 47k resistor that acts as the MM phono input resistance, and as I said in my last message, modding the input capacitance will be trickier because there is a choke that adds an as-of-now unknown amount of capacitance.

If the C-50 sounds similar to the CX-1, perhaps I'll just stay put then. Especially if modding the CX-1 (as I describe above) is a possibility. No need to make a sideways move at this point.

I was just checking out some info. on the C-70, and that one seems more interesting than the C-50. Not only does it have the capacitance/resistance switching functionality, but it also has a direct input for MM carts as well (the C-50 only has a direct input for MC carts).

 

[Mysteryed]

Look-up the relay problems of the C-50... Mine is now sitting in a closet. Maybe someone has found a solution.

 

[ledzep1968]

I have two C-50s both powering Carver amps. The C-50 is one of the best pre-amps that I have heard, in my humble opinion. The phono inputs are gold plated as is the record and pre-outs I think. The phono input sounds great on my system. I love the frequency knobs too, you can control which frequencies you want highlighted, not just all bass or treble.

I'd suggest buying this if it's at a good price.

 

[steelglam]

I have two C-50s both powering Carver amps. The C-50 is one of the best pre-amps that I have heard, in my humble opinion. The phono inputs are gold plated as is the record and pre-outs I think. The phono input sounds great on my system. I love the frequency knobs too, you can control which frequencies you want highlighted, not just all bass or treble.

I'd suggest buying this if it's at a good price.

The inputs and outputs on the CX-1 are gold plated too.

I don't use tone controls much, but the C-70 seems to add an additional level of functionality (over the C-50) in that regard by including an actual parametric EQ. Just in case folks are interested.

The price is good, but it's not less than I paid for the CX-1. It's also got some cosmetic problems in terms of scratches. If it's a lateral move sound-wise relative to the CX-1, I'll probably pass.

 

[cdfac]

the CX-1 is supposed to have one of the better-sounding line stages of any Yamaha preamp. i think the C-50 would probably be somewhat of a step down in that respect.

 

[steelglam]

the CX-1 is supposed to have one of the better-sounding line stages of any Yamaha preamp. i think the C-50 would probably be somewhat of a step down in that respect.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking as well. I guess I could use the C-50 as the phono stage and the CX-1 as the line stage, but that seems a little too much. And I'm not even certain the C-50's phono stage would be an overall sonic improvement over the CX-1's, as Dr. Ear indicates that the two sound very similar. The C-50 would allow more tweaking of the sound with the added functionality, but I'm not sure getting the C-50 solely for this purpose would be the most effective or efficient way to go about adding tweakability to the system.

 

[psemeraro]

Bought a C-50 a few weeks ago for a song to stand in for my Conrad Johnson PV12AL while it gets repaired. All relays work but switches and vol pot were dirty. With use vol pot is cleaning up, hard wire bypassed the tone control in/out switch. (I dont use tone controls) Also recapped the power electros in the power supply and "flat amp". The pre sounds amazing! It is in fact DC coupled through the line stage. With Elna Silmic2 for the 2 main caps and Panasonic FR (100uf 50v replacing the 10uf 35v original caps) for all the others, the brightness went away and the image became huge. The pre is stunningly clear and more importantly, has a great 3D image and very good texture to the audio. Every solid state pre I've tried falls on its face in dimensionality and texture compared to the Conrad Johnson except for this C-50. Comparing its phono stage to my V-cap modded Quicksilver phono pre, the Yamaha is ...ok, but better than many outboard phono pre's available currently under $1000. Recapping the phono section will be interesting as I'm curious to its potential. It has good "bones" for sure. At the output of the "eq amp" instead of using a bipolar electro, there are two polar electros in series. Yuk! Those will be replaced by an 8uf Russian polystyrene. If the phono section turns out to be great, then I'll change the 47k loading resistor to a naked Vishay (use those in everything!) and have a kick ass B-system. Cheers!