Considering a Tube Preamp - Would appreciate suggestions

Hi,

My only experience with tube pres was my college housemate had a C22 and I remember I loved his system. That was a long time ago & I really only have that impression to go by. I'd like to start moving to the McIntosh line with tubes and would like to get a pre to start the build with.

I like the idea of a vintage pre but perhaps the newer digital line of tube pres are sonically better, they do cost more but that's not a gauge of what is better to the ear. It would be great to be able to compare each of them in one sitting but that's not possible. It would be helpful to know if the vintage pres are sonically superior to the modern pres, or vice versa.

I've searched within Audiokarma & with Google to read up as much as possible & with all the differing info, overload is starting in. I have been mostly focusing on the C20, C22, C220 and C2200 and have a few questions which if answered may help.

The vintage Pres I seem to find available are the C11, C20 & C22. I haven't found much with the C11 though so have read mostly about the other two; With the C20, it sounds like there were three versions. Though I like the idea of a vintage pre, I understand I will probably want to replace the caps and maybe the tubes. I see sets of telefunken tubes sold at high prices but if they truly make a significant difference I would want to install them and that will add to the base price. Doing those replacements would appear to be the same issue with a C22.

- As to the C20, Is there a serial number archive available that will tell me which version they are when I find one I'm interested in?

As regards the C220 and C2200, they are decidedly more expensive and I wonder if the digital aspect to them affects the sound or if that is removed and that end is still analog? It would be nice to have the bells and whistles if they will be useful to me, but my real interest is in stereo.

I do have a B&O turntable model 5913 which uses a MMC3 stylus but B&O is out of business and I don't know which kind of pickup it uses. I went to the McIntoshlabs.com site and tried to look up info on the C2200 regarding the phono inputs but they don't provide information regarding legacy equipment. With that, I don't know if the newer pres with phono will work with my turntable.

Any suggestions or ideas will be appreciated.

Gary

I'll suggest you add the MX-110 tuner/pre to the list of candidates. They were very popular, sold in good quantity and have excellent preamp performance. Further, many were installed in consoles so have had little problems with cosmetics outside of the items found in thread discussions here at AK.

Its preamp brother, the C22, was held in high esteem and tend to command higher prices as a result.

Cheers,

David

Thanks for the suggestion. I do like the lines of older equipment though none of my current stereo system is older than the 80's (Klipsch).

Are there different versions of the MX-110? If so, which one do I look for & is it branded that way or is it done by serial #? Also, does it use the volume control I have read about that was problematic in the C20?

It would be helpful to be able to A/B the different preamps so I could tell which sounded better to me but not being able to do that I need to rely on opinions of those who have actually heard the comparisons. I'm really not that into the aesthetics of older vs newer amps, the sound is all I'm interested in.

Other than the collector's appreciation with older gear, are the newer tube amps like the C220 & C2200 considered more or less desirable or from an audio standpoint? If the levels were kept the same, would someone with their eyes closed, not knowing which was being A/B'd, tell the difference between say a C22/MX-110 & a C220/C2200?

One would hope the efforts of design in the tube Preamps over the years have improved the audio quality. Sometimes you can't improve on a good thing and re-engineering only lessens the quality or at best leaves it the same. Knowing that would help me decide.

Cheers,

Gary

Remember the new Mac pre-amps are hybrids, not pure tubes. So if you want tubes, that means, C-11 and 22, or C-20 or MX110. Having lived with step tone controls for close to 40 years, where the steps are to large, I would go for the MX-110 or C-20. And having some experience with both, if you can find a rebuilt C-20, that would be my choice. I do like the sound of the C-500T, not so much the 2300 and 220. The 2200 is not on my favorites list either. The C-22CE though a hybrid is to be considered as the steps on the tone controls are quite as extreme, and its very quiet like the C500T. But as I'm a SS guy, I would love to replace my C34 with a C40 if I had the room in the console..

My vote is for the C220, it has almost the same technology and almost a similar sound quality as the C2300 and sounds better than most if not all of the older tube preamp. I went from C28 to C29 to C220 and finally C2300.

miketuason said:

My vote is for the C220, it has almost the same technology and almost a similar sound quality as the C2300 and sounds better than most if not all of the older tube preamp. I went from C28 to C29 to C220 and finally C2300.

Click to expand...

Second that opinion. The first time I listened to the C2300, it thought, gosh this sounds like my old C33 but just so much better.

I just got the C2500 on Friday. I went with it over the 2200 and 2300 due to the digital aspects, especially the asynchronous usb input. The sound is remarkable and is dead quiet.

Here's another vote for the C220. It's got all the conveniences of a modern pre (like a remote, tons of ins and outs, etc) while still giving you a nice taste of that McTube sound. It's also new enough that you won't have to worry about much for a long time to come.

jblnut

Thanks for all the thoughts & suggestions.

I spent a lot of time figuring out what I already own, what I will be able to let go of depending on which features I get with each of the various pres and tuner/pres like the MX110 (Which sounds like a really nice choice). I also weighed in on the comments here and those from the oh-so-many searches I've done recently. So here's my thinking & conclusion.

The reality is I don't want to buy a high end CD player because I have all my CD collection converted to flac and will be using that from now on instead of using a CD player (I will over time migrate my vinyl to flac as well) and now the first issue starts with the DAC. My USB sound card DAC is better than the built-in one in the computer but it's a $140 unit and isn't stellar, nothing like the quality of a McIntosh DAC. For me to play into any fine pre, I would need to have as good a DAC as a McIntosh provides or it would embarrass the audio quality before it ever got to the pre. Considering this and that I can easily sell my current sound card, the C2500 starts becoming attractive.

Since I rarely listen to FM, my NAD works well and is all I need. My Cambridge Audio pre is well designed & is pristine so it will sell easily. I use a mono channel Daking Mic Pre one for studio recording, it's mint and I can now let that go as well by using the McIntosh pre in its place. If I purchase a highly desirable pre, I can always do well when reselling it if I wish to upgrade in the future.

With all considered, the simplest way to upgrade my system and in the end, the least expensive way to achieve what I want at this point in time, is to go for a used C2500. I just did that this morning and it will be arriving Friday.

Now to look into how well my father's collection of tubes from his TV/radio repair days has what I need. I know there are at least two NOS Sylvania 12AX7 from the 60's in there. Once I dig into his carrying cases that are still full of tubes, I might have enough 12AX7 in the collection for the entire amp. If so, it'll be interesting to see if there's any beneficial difference.

Thanks for the earlier suggestions!

Congrats on the purchase!

Convert vinyl to flac? CD conversion to flac I get (digital to digital) but try out the MM or MC input first on the C2500. Maybe convert one of your favorite LP's to flac, and then compare to the original vinyl before you convert the rest.

After auditioning the C50 and C2300 I enjoyed the C2300 more, it really is a pretty amazing pre-amp. I had an opportunity to score a C500T for a killer price shipped that was a few years old but that fell through for other reasons, and truth be told, I don't think there would be much improvement despite the dual mono design. I dedicated that budget instead to the MT10 TT and it will probably provide far more enjoyment than the C500's difference in quality, whatever it is.

I may still go for the C2500 at some point, but with the D100 as good as it is claimed to be, the C2300/D100 combo may be better, and would still allow that eventual move up to the C500T should I find it something I want later.

Congrats on the C2500. I lust after it primarily because it's on the newer chassis with the tubes more visible at the front, the gold lettering on the top like the amps and the polished steel bottom (silly to lust after it for looks, I know, but it really is beautiful).

playdrv4me said:

Congrats on the C2500. I lust after it primarily because it's on the newer chassis with the tubes more visible at the front, the gold lettering on the top like the amps and the polished steel bottom (silly to lust after it for looks, I know, but it really is beautiful).

Click to expand...

LOL, you should have seen my 1st Mrs... She was in the Sunday papers in St. Louis demoing underwear for local chains. I do understand the lusting after looks.


:tresbon:

playdrv4me said:

After auditioning the C50 and C2300 I enjoyed the C2300 more, it really is a pretty amazing pre-amp. I had an opportunity to score a C500T for a killer price shipped that was a few years old but that fell through for other reasons, and truth be told, I don't think there would be much improvement despite the dual mono design. I dedicated that budget instead to the MT10 TT and it will probably provide far more enjoyment than the C500's difference in quality, whatever it is.

I may still go for the C2500 at some point, but with the D100 as good as it is claimed to be, the C2300/D100 combo may be better, and would still allow that eventual move up to the C500T should I find it something I want later.

Congrats on the C2500. I lust after it primarily because it's on the newer chassis with the tubes more visible at the front, the gold lettering on the top like the amps and the polished steel bottom (silly to lust after it for looks, I know, but it really is beautiful).

Click to expand...

That is part of the Mc appeal - where they make something sound and look really beautiful.