dubai2000 Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 First: sorry for the misspelled name! Much as I like the very musical sound of the MX-110, there is no denying that at frequency extremes the preamp is less open/revealing than a modern preamp. Is that a characteristic one has to accept (on the lines of Kelly's argument that vintage preamps have to many parts in their circuit) or would a change of certain tubes help (which ones - positions?). BTW: the MX-110 in question was brought up to specs by Audio Classics, so internal parts should be fine. Thanks in advance for a response. Wolfram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Landau Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Wolfram, Try changing the 12ax7's with Mullards CV4004's, but please be aware that some of them can be microphonic when used in the phono section. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai2000 Posted January 23, 2004 Author Share Posted January 23, 2004 Guy, thanks for the info - but I am just thinking of the line section - I am so pleased with the Rohman/Holfi combo that I am only considering the line stage of the MX-110 - so which tubes would that be? - the manual I have isn't clear in that respect. Wolfram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 You didnt ask me and I am sure Allan will respond with his own take, but I feel that one thing needs to be clarified on my position here. I dont think that one needs to have the ultimate in transparency to enjoy the music. Certain pieces of gear can provide a synergistic match as well as a "character" that brings more enjoyment. Call it soul or whatever. But sometimes this kind of substance can bring great things. In a way, this is how I interpret some McIntosh gear and perhaps Allan's system in general. I think it's a system that has great presence and life in this way. Count the TD-124 here. In a way, I think the Linn deserves mention too as it has more character per say than my Progressive-Engineering table. The PE table is more neutral perhaps, but the Linn has more soul and I ultimately like this setup despite the weaknesses. I have been critical of McIntosh in the past for some qualities. I have not heard the MC-30 and really want to. But for their preamps, more than a few that I have heard in either friend's systems or setups over the years, they have never sounded particularly revealing or the ultimate in transparency. On the other hand, they do have other good qualities that I mentioned above. Perhaps Allan has a secret tube combinatin that he has stumbled upon that brings this pre to another level (he uses the C22 I believe). I have always found the McIntosh gear to be more "there" there. More in the picture. They are NOT the best at removing layers of film like going to a modern solution. But the Mac system does allow boogie factor and perhaps that soul. Audio Research sounds very transparent but also kind of bleached. The CJ stuff sounds more warm and "round" but can be too much a good thing. I like the 6SN7/5692 because it has a very fluid and texture free quality without sounding dull. Still, the MAc preamps always sound like too much in the way of things, almost like a cloud bank although that is a gross exaggeration and my apologies for the connotations (edit: that cloud bank is WAAAY overstated - I really mean more of a character imparted...). I think it's a combination of many things though I know many here dont mind the use of controls etc. I have become so sensitive to this after living for years with a passive and with minimal tube preamps. For some reason, I just think the preamp needs to have good drive, but also completely get out of the way. It's a touch balancing act. Thinking about it gets in the way of music, too. I think Allan has bypassed all this and just enjoyes the music, a good place to be. Also, I am sure that if anyone knows a good tube combo for the MAC, it's Allan. kh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Songer Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 It's been a while since I've been inside an MX-110, but if I remember correctly it uses a pair of 6U8 for the line stage and a pair of 12AX7 for the phono. There might be another 12AX7 as well, but I don't recall. I remember using Telefunken 6U8 with great success and Mullard long-plate and/or CV4004 in the phono. I might be TOTALLY wrong about this, but that's how I remember it. Anyway, the C22 is more transparent and revealing than the C11 or MX-110. Sure, the modern preamps are VERY transparent, but to my tastes they tend to sound VERY thin. One's man's "rich" is another's "mud" just as one man's "revealing" is another man's "thin." Anyway, Kelly has hit it right on the head. I am HAPPY with this system and I've pretty much STOPPED looking to upgrade. No, it's not the end-all in high end audio (no system with Cornwalls will EVER be that!), but it SATISFIES me. I fall right into the music and forget about everything else--and isn't that the point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazman Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 ---------------- On 1/23/2004 7:16:46 PM Allan Songer wrote: ...I am HAPPY with this system and I've pretty much STOPPED looking to upgrade. No, it's not the end-all in high end audio (no system with Cornwalls will EVER be that!), but it SATISFIES me. I fall right into the music and forget about everything else--and isn't that the point? ---------------- Allan, Though not a church goer, may I offer an, AMEN BROTHER! Klipsch out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai2000 Posted January 23, 2004 Author Share Posted January 23, 2004 Thanks for the feedback. Yes, it is the music that matters and there is no denying that both, the MX-110 and the AE-1 - different as they sound-, are nice and satisfying pieces of equipment. I was only wondering how/if there might be some more quality in the MX-110 I might be missing. Wolfram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st. patrick Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Guy, i have a mx 110 as well and have the same questions as wolfram (except i am willing to switch all the tubes). thank you for the input, but what does it mean when you say it might be microphonic? thanks for any guidance, patrick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Landau Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 ---------------- On 1/23/2004 7:49:12 PM st. patrick wrote: Guy, i have a mx 110 as well and have the same questions as wolfram (except i am willing to switch all the tubes). thank you for the input, but what does it mean when you say it might be microphonic? thanks for any guidance, patrick ---------------- The tube amplifies vibrations and it has a microphonic effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st. patrick Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 thank you, appreciate the patience as i learn this stuff. patrick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshnich Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 I too have a MX 110. And I have to tell you that I also find the dynamics lacking. I bought the MC225 power amp and absolutely love it. i was very excited to add the MAC pre amp to the mix. I had been using my Cary SLP 808 pre which I like a bunch. Wwell I have to say that I also think that the MAC preamp sounds a little muddy to my ears. the 225 sings with the Cary but I sounds pretty pedestrian with the MX 110. I havent tried changing out the tubes, but I really dont think its a tube issue - its just a personal taste issue. Josh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie dave Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 Allan, thanks for your guidance on the C20. I picked it up, and really do have a jewel for relatively little money for its condition. All Teles except two Mullards for the phono sections, and a Mullard on the outboard along with a green Sylvania 6X4. I hooked it up and it is smoking on Miles Davis. The more I listen to the Mac tube preamps, the happier I become with the way they handle jazz and blues recordings. They seem to add meat and substance to naturally spare and sparse recordings which have much internal distance within the composition. Rock recordings and other multi-instrument arrangements that need seperation to distinctly and comfortably listen are not as well served by the Macs, but they still give the AESs a solid run for the money where you don't expect them even on the same racetrack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.