Yamaha preamps

[Obtheres]

I have a CX-1000U and love it, I use the internal DAC exclusively. It was noticeably better than -every- other DAC or CD player I've plugged into the CX-1000. Granted, I haven't tried any of the really high end mega buck DACs, or a 24 bit upsampler, but it was vastly more musical and defined than my Rega Planet, which has been relegated to transport duty Honestly, I didn't expect an obsolete DAC to sound as good as it does.

 

[Yamahalic]

I have a CX-1000U and love it, I use the internal DAC exclusively. It was noticeably better than -every- other DAC or CD player I've plugged into the CX-1000. Granted, I haven't tried any of the really high end mega buck DACs, or a 24 bit upsampler, but it was vastly more musical and defined than my Rega Planet, which has been relegated to transport duty Honestly, I didn't expect an obsolete DAC to sound as good as it does.

I agree. One benefit that can be presumed is that you can take several source components from various manufacturers (with varying DAC differences), and consolidate all into one "known commodity" DAC for ultimate system tuning.

It should be mentioned that the CX1000U is also very versatile in that provides BOTH coax and optical digital inputs, and two digital recording outputs as well. And, it also has two sets of line level outputs to drive two separate amps.

 

[the-real-mandak]

TRM, does the C-2x or C-85 have digital inputs?

No, the C-2x and C-85 are too old for this digital stuff (the C-85 is an extension of the C-80 design).

And I did not make a shootout compairing the CX-1000 DAC and ohter TOTL Yamaha CDP's, but we do know it has the BB 16bit DAC and Yamahas Hi-Bit filter just as the CDX-1110. So the performance would like the CDX-1110.

For the shootout I did with the pre's, I used the Yamaha CDX-993 (Pro-Bit).

 

[Yamahalic]

No, the C-2x and C-85 are too old for this digital stuff (the C-85 is an extension of the C-80 design).

And I did not make a shootout compairing the CX-1000 DAC and ohter TOTL Yamaha CDP's, but we do know it has the BB 16bit DAC and Yamahas Hi-Bit filter just as the CDX-1110. So the performance would like the CDX-1110.

For the shootout I did with the pre's, I used the Yamaha CDX-993 (Pro-Bit).

Interesting, I always wondered if there were ever any internal differences between the CDX-2xxx and their CDX-1xxx relatives. The CDX-1110 looks like a black version of the CDX-2000. The CDX-2000 manual says it has twin/L&R 18bit floating DACs with the Hi-Bit filter. The CX-1000 manual DAC description sounds the same (twin 18bit floating DACs) as the CDX. So, the CX-1000 must be something special to have similar DAC system as the CDX-2000. Vintage stuff can be cool!!!

 

[jhal]

I own a CX-830, and up until recently, was happy with it. Being almost 20 years old, and very hot running (no vents :withstpd, it is starting to have some issues. I can't compare it to other Yamaha preamps, I have never heard them.

 

[the-real-mandak]

I always wondered if there were ever any internal differences between the CDX-2xxx and their CDX-1xxx relatives.
The CDX-1110 looks like a black version of the CDX-2000. The CDX-2000 manual says it has twin/L&R 18bit floating DACs with the Hi-Bit filter.
So, the CX-1000 must be something special to have similar DAC system as the CDX-2000. Vintage stuff can be cool!!!

Manly the difference betwen the 1xxx and the 2xxx is better shilding and nicer craftmanship.

The CDX-1110, 2000 and the CX-1000 all run the same DAC, the BB PCM56P 16bit: http://www.datasheetcatalog.org/datasheet/BurrBrown/mXutrrt.pdf

Yes the CX-1000 was something special, it takes a really good DAC or CD-P to outperform it. And it would properly respond well to tweeks, but i do not know any who did that.

 

[BroonsBane]

Yes the CX-1000 was something special, it takes a really good DAC or CD-P to outperform it. And it would properly respond well to tweeks, but i do not know any who did that.

Didn't Y B-2 have his CX-1000 gone through by EW? I thought he had said that at some point but I'm not sure what exactly EW did to it...

 

[the-real-mandak]

I don't think EW did anything to the digital section, to really do something there would mean new opamps and clock. But EW can properly say what he did to it (if he did).

 

[rvito]

what do you consider a good price?

 

[Yamahalic]

Manly the difference betwen the 1xxx and the 2xxx is better shilding and nicer craftmanship.

The CDX-1110, 2000 and the CX-1000 all run the same DAC, the BB PCM56P 16bit: http://www.datasheetcatalog.org/datasheet/BurrBrown/mXutrrt.pdf

Yes the CX-1000 was something special, it takes a really good DAC or CD-P to outperform it. And it would properly respond well to tweeks, but i do not know any who did that.

Also, some of the units 18-bit DACs, and some had multiple DACs. Here is a partial from one source ( http://www.vasiltech.nm.ru/files/cd-players/CD-Player-DAC-Transport.htm#Y ):

YAMAHA CDX-1100...2 x PCM56P
YAMAHA CDX-1110...2 x PCM56P-K
YAMAHA CDX-1120...4 x PCM58P-J
YAMAHA CDX-2000...2 x PCM56P-K
YAMAHA CDX-2020...4 x PCM58P-J
YAMAHA CDX-2200...2 x PCM56P-K

If this list is correct, then the CDX1120/2020 were extraordinary in terms of processing power.

I wonder if there are similar lists on the web somewhere for preamps?

 

[the-real-mandak]

what do you consider a good price?

That would depend on where in the world you are located

Also, some of the units 18-bit DACs, and some had multiple DACs.
If this list is correct, then the CDX1120/2020 were extraordinary in terms of processing power.

I suspect that you are talking about CD-Ps and not the CX-1000, since they only came with the 16bit DAC.

Yes the CDX-xx20 units was extraordinary, but not as much as the CDX-5000 and 10000.

But not to high jack this thread, I will suggest you thake the CD-P discussion to the CDX thread in the digital section where the CDX line is talked about in detail.

 

[Yamahalic]

I suspect that you are talking about CD-Ps and not the CX-1000, since they only came with the 16bit DAC.

Yes, I could only find DAC data on CDPlayers of that era, but I mention it because it make sense to consider the CDP DAC choice in addition to the PreAmp DAC choice together. In the case of the CX-1000, the DAC quality is high, thus a wider choice is available as to what CDP to pair with it. If a PreAmp was to be used that had no digital inputs, then a CDP with a higher level DAC might be a wise choice.

 

[Dr. Ear]

Go for a CX-1. Despite some opinions posted here it is better, means more musical than the C2-x which my sound a bit overcontrolled. The CX-1 is much newer, too.

 

[darth]

I own a Yamaha CX-830 preamp and I'm very impressed with the phono section it has. Quiet, clean sound. Good luck finding one!!

 

[centaurus3200]

i've had a MINT Yamaha C-80, complete with box, manual...everything. i couldn't sell that thing fast enough! blech!

that thing couldn't hold a candle to my other preamps. Conrad Johnson PV2a, Precision Fidelity C-4, Quad 34.

wanna know what sounds better than any of the aforementioned preamps?

YAMAHA C-70! my little C-70 is one of the most musical preamps i've ever owned. and has the most quiet and dynamic phono stages i've ever had in my system (McIntosh MC60 tube monoblocks, Yamaha NS-1000M, REL Q100 sub).

i can't explain it. i think that quality between the C-70 and the C-80 really fell off. you can feel the difference between the two. not to mention they replaced the slick relay actuated selectors with simple push buttons in the C-80. the main reason i think is that fricken active loudness contour in the C-80 and later yamaha preamps. really mucks up the sound and you can't turn it off. the result is the preamp sounds both veiled and harsh at the same time.

anywho, my friend didn't believe that this worthless little crap can could sound so good. so he brought over his tricked out MFA Magus C tube preamp for a little battle. he hates his Magus now ;-)

i mainly listen to vinyl (modded Technics SL-1600MK2 turntable, cardas tonearm rewire, van den hul retipped Spectral MCR Signature MC cartridge). pure heaven!

see ya,
Robby

 

[steelglam]

Thanks so much to everyone for their thoughts on these preamps.

the-real-mandak: Thanks for the detailed analysis, as that was extremely helpful. I'm starting to get a clear picture about how all of these Yamaha preamps match up.

One quick follow-up question: where do folks think that the Yamaha C2a fits into the pecking order? Wajobu briefly mentioned it earlier in the thread, but he noted that it tends to suffer from broken RCA connectors. Is it one to generally be avoided, then, or only purchased at a really cheap price (like under $100)?

 

[Asha]

The C-2a is a very good pre-amp. It fits in between the C-2 and C-2x with respect to quality (better than the C-2 and bettered by the C-2x). It is probably the best bang for the buck of that generation. If you find one for under $100, it would be a steal.

However, while that generation has excellent phono stages, none have a built-in DAC, if that's important to you.

I have both the C-2 and C-2x and use a CI Audio VAC2 w/VAC DAC and though I am curious to try a CX-1000, as it would be simpler, the sound my setup currently delivers is stellar to my ears.

 

[steelglam]

Thanks, Asha.

I've got a question about the phono stages of several of these Yamaha amps. It seems like most folks say that the phono stages of the C2 and CX-1 were great for their time but were bested by later versions of those models. My question then becomes: how do the phono stages of the later versions compare? Specifically, will the phono stage performance of the CX-1000, C-2x, and C-2a all be relatively the same, or is there a definite phono stage rank order between those three higher end preamps?

 

[Asha]

I haven't had the pleasure of trying the CX-1000 (or CX-1) yet unfortunately, so I'm not able to answer that directly. Hopefully, someone else who has will, as I would be interested in their impressions as well.

I will say, though, that at least with respect to the C-2x, I haven't read that its phono stage is only "good for its day". On the contrary, I have read that it was a true statement piece and one of the all-time best Yamaha pre's. It was introduced in 1985, I believe, when vinyl was still king and CDs hadn't yet taken over. So, a phono stage good for that day would be very good indeed. I don't think you would be disappointed with any of these models. I know I wouldn't be.

 

[steelglam]

I haven't had the pleasure of trying the CX-1000 (or CX-1) yet unfortunately, so I'm not able to answer that directly. Hopefully, someone else who has will, as I would be interested in their impressions as well.

I will say, though, that at least with respect to the C-2x, I haven't read that its phono stage is only "good for its day". On the contrary, I have read that it was a true statement piece and one of the all-time best Yamaha pre's. It was introduced in 1985, I believe, when vinyl was still king and CDs hadn't yet taken over. So, a phono stage good for that day would be very good indeed. I don't think you would be disappointed with any of these models. I know I wouldn't be.

Thanks, Asha. As for the C-2x, yeah it seems that is like the premier Yamaha preamp. What I meant was that it seems folks are saying that the earlier C-2's phono stage was great for its day but that it was eventually bested by the C-2a and C-2x.