Anyone know much about Yamaha cx-1 preamp

theokalat

Active Member
I found a Yamaha cx-1. Owner is asking $400 (I offered him $300), but do not know much about it. Is it worth that much.
Thinking of swapping it with my terrific adcom gfp-565 and mate it up to my Yamaha mx-2000 amp.

Does anyone know if the cx-1 is a better preamp than the adcom, has anyone compared the two. Don't want to buy it , and it sounds worse and then have to try to flog it off on fleebay at a big loss.

How would it compare to other Yamaha TOTL preamps like the c2x, c2a, c85/80 and cx1000/2000.

cheers

Theo
 
Last edited:
The CX-1 is an excellent preamplifier, IMHO this jewel is totally underrated.
Owing a C-4, CX-70, C-80 and having owned a C2-x for 18 years the CX-1 is one if the best. Some time ago we made a comparison between various phono stages, inkl. the hyped Linn Linto and the CX-1 was second after the Pass Xono. The build quality is perfect, it has a remote control and sounds neutral AND involving. It surly will serve you for a long time. Get it!
 
Thanks Dr Ear for your valuable input.

How do you think the cx-1 compares to the c-2x.

I listened to a c-2x a few years ago, I remember being astounded at its sonic quality, and ever since I have been on the lookout for one to match up with my brilliant Yamaha mx-2000 amp ( got the mx-2000 at a pawn shop for $200), but here in Australia, been such a small market for electronic consumer products, no luck in finding one so far, and probably never will find one in my lifetime. Bugger.

How do you compare yamaha's old classic A1 to the current AS-2000 in terms of sonic ability.Have you done an a/b between them. Just curious as I also have an A1 in my second system and I think it comes very close sonically to the gfp-565/mx-2000 combo in my main system when hooked up to the same speakers.

Yeah, I may well grab the cx-1, and if it compares favourably to the adcom, I will definitely keep it.
One of the reasons I want it is it has a remote for adjusting volume etc, the adcom doesn't, I am getting rusty or lazy as I grow older year after year, and could not be bothered getting up to adjust volume.
 
Last edited:
Other than the C-2x, this is Yamaha's best preamp (IMHO, of course). Suffers from two things. One, the standard Yamaha cold solder joints on the RCAs can pop up like on all Yamaha preamps. The second is a design flaw (at least it was for me) in that it only has a single set of output RCAs. I prefer two so can bi-amp or run a powered sub, etc. Other than that, it has a great sounding, flexible phono-stage and, best of all for us lazy folks who hate to get up and run across the room to turn it down so can hear what the wife is yelling down the stairway to us, it is remote capable.
 
BTW - just checked and have both manuals in electronic format should you purchase (which I recommend - a great preamp).
 
Thanks MX117.

I definitely will grab the cx-1.
I would love to grab the service manual if you have it. Already downloaded a user manual.
Cheers
 
Well I took the plunge and grabbed the cx-1. Now just waiting nervously for it to be delivered by those gorillas at Australia Post. Very rough in their handling of parcels.Hope the seller double boxes it.

Hope it outperforms the adcom, it will take something very special from the cx-1 to do this in my opinion.We'll see.
The remote at least will be a very welcome addition though.Main reason for buying the cx-1.

After some googling, quite a few owners of the cx-1 compared it favourably to the c-2x and cx-1000/2000 as being more musical,and only the legendary c1 and cx-10000 can better the cx-1.
That sounds very encouraging and puts my mind at ease somewhat, especially at the high price I paid for the cx-1.

Anyone else with their experience of Yamaha preamps is very welcome to post their opinions.


Cheers
 
Last edited:
Forgot to add that now you really need to come up with a Yamaha B-2 to go with the CX-1. It is easily the best Yamaha system I've ever had driving a set of NS-1000 speakers. Good luck with all.
 
I have a CX-1 and use it all of the time. Very solid and well built preamp. You will like it and what do you buy for $300 these days that is super quality like this ?? You could pay $2000 for a preamp as good as this these days ;)

I took some pictures of mine once with the top removed.

P1010366.jpg


P1010365.jpg
 
Congrats on the new purchase! While not in the same league, I have a CX-630 preamp and it is surprisingly good. It has many desirable features including MM/MC phono switching, variable loudness, source direct capability and a remote control. I am not (yet) familiar with the CX-1 but I am looking forward to hearing your assesment of it.
 
Forgot to add that now you really need to come up with a Yamaha B-2 to go with the CX-1. It is easily the best Yamaha system I've ever had driving a set of NS-1000 speakers. Good luck with all.

Heard great things about the B series of amps. Love to get one just to compare with my yamaha mx-2000.
Reading many peoples comparisons on the net between the two, there probably would not be a clear winner in sonic performance.

So I will probably stay with the mx-2000 for a little while longer, as I have not heard anything out there that comes close to it.
 
Just stay with the MX-2000, it is one of Yamahas finest power amps and excepte from the MX-10000 the only other Yamaha amp running MOS-FETs (the MX-D1 might also). It will also do well with the CX-1, even it do not match the build quality of the MX-2000 (not many units do).

For the CX-1 it was the last TOTL in the seperates series from Yamaha and many users (who also had other TOTL Yamaha pre amps) like it, even they often put it below the CX-1000/2000. But just use you're ears and judge for you self, the Adcom will get some hard competition.

I would like a CX-2000 to go with my MX-2000, I do have a 1000 but it just dossen't look right - even I do better like the sound coming from my C-2x.

One of the main things to focus on is what media do you use for critical listning, if it's vinyl - keep looking for a C-2x. But if it's CDs, then I would look for a CX-2000. SACD or DVD-Audio has not been part of my setup, so i can't say about those but the really special thing about the C-2x is the phonostage, it is properly the best Yamaha ever did (not counting the HX-10000).

A NOTE: It is not all the B series that are V-FETs, only the B-1, B-2 and B-3.
 
Last edited:
Just stay with the MX-2000, it is one of Yamahas finest power amps and excepte from the MX-10000 the only other Yamaha amp running MOS-FETs (the MX-D1 might also). It will also do well with the CX-1, even it do not match the build quality of the MX-2000 (not many units do). A NOTE: It is not all the B series that are V-FETs, only the B-1, B-2 and B-3.
To my ears, the MX-2000 sounds 'bright' through the NS-1000/NS-1000M while the B-2 sounds more musical and smoother. YMMV.
 
Well it might be the special combo, many NS-1000/B-2 users feel there is a special "magic" with this combo. The V-FET amps are known especially for the smooth highs and musicality, but most of them are kind of limited in power (even the ratings are conservative). Now don't get this wrong, they are not under powered. They are just not that powerful, if you need more than 100w - well then the only one is the B-1. More than 150w, well V-FET are out of the option. So they do have there limitations, they are not for all speakers.

What I can say is that in my setup the MX-2000 is smoother and much better defined in the high than the M-80, 85, 50 and Sony TA-N55ES. I have not yet repaired any of my B's so at the moment can't compare them. My opinion is that the MX-2000 is one of the most leaned back amps Yamaha ever did.

A friend of mine compared his B-2x and the MX-2000 on a set of NS-1000M, his comment was - well they sound different. He did not say anything about bright, later he brought home some of his colleagues to audition his system (CX/MX-2000, PF-1000, CDX-2020 and NS-1000M). There verdict was that Yamaha didn’t do that bad back in the 80’s, again nothing about bright. They are all working for Lyngdorf Audio, so I trust they are experienced listeners. The thing is, it’s all coming down to how does it sound in you’re room, in you’re setup, with you’re music running.
What speakers do theokalat run?
 
Well it might be the special combo, many NS-1000/B-2 users feel there is a special "magic" with this combo. The V-FET amps are known especially for the smooth highs and musicality, but most of them are kind of limited in power (even the ratings are conservative). Now don't get this wrong, they are not under powered. They are just not that powerful, if you need more than 100w - well then the only one is the B-1. More than 150w, well V-FET are out of the option. So they do have there limitations, they are not for all speakers.

What I can say is that in my setup the MX-2000 is smoother and much better defined in the high than the M-80, 85, 50 and Sony TA-N55ES. I have not yet repaired any of my B's so at the moment can't compare them. My opinion is that the MX-2000 is one of the most leaned back amps Yamaha ever did.

A friend of mine compared his B-2x and the MX-2000 on a set of NS-1000M, his comment was - well they sound different. He did not say anything about bright, later he brought home some of his colleagues to audition his system (CX/MX-2000, PF-1000, CDX-2020 and NS-1000M). There verdict was that Yamaha didn’t do that bad back in the 80’s, again nothing about bright. They are all working for Lyngdorf Audio, so I trust they are experienced listeners. The thing is, it’s all coming down to how does it sound in you’re room, in you’re setup, with you’re music running.
What speakers do theokalat run?


Speakers I am currently using are a diy kit I built but designed by Zaph Audio, the ZRT 2.5 floorstanders. All Scanspeak drivers, trully wonderful sounding, pinpoint imaging, phenomenal wide soundstage, very deep tight bass. Never heard anything better, including the NS1000's I had before these.

Here's a link to the zaph audio site if anyone wants more info on the zrts and other kit designs zaph has available free for anyone to build.
http://www.zaphaudio.com/ZRT.html

Should get the cx-1 in the post tommorrow, seller says he double boxed it with lots of foam padding inside, can't wait to compare to my adcom gfp565 preamp.
Must admit though, it will take one mighty fine pre to beat the adcom, which was recently recapped with nothing but the best caps and resistors, so called "audiophile" power cord (made a noticeable difference with a tighter and more controlled bass), and wbt nextgen rca jacks(cleaned up the sound with better highs). Difference is night and day after these mods.

I thingk the cx-1 may be up for a similar mod to the adcom and only then a fair comparison can be made.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Dr Ear for your valuable input.

How do you think the cx-1 compares to the c-2x.

I listened to a c-2x a few years ago, I remember being astounded at its sonic quality, and ever since I have been on the lookout for one to match up with my brilliant Yamaha mx-2000 amp ( got the mx-2000 at a pawn shop for $200), but here in Australia, been such a small market for electronic consumer products, no luck in finding one so far, and probably never will find one in my lifetime. Bugger.

How do you compare yamaha's old classic A1 to the current AS-2000 in terms of sonic ability.Have you done an a/b between them. Just curious as I also have an A1 in my second system and I think it comes very close sonically to the gfp-565/mx-2000 combo in my main system when hooked up to the same speakers.

Well, the C-2x sound not as involving as the CX-1. This is not my opinion only, but all my friends do have the same impression. Both sound clean but the CX-1 is more "musical".
If you look inside both preamps the CX-1 is a completely different construction. You have to look closer look because at the first glance the C-2x looks more like an "high end" product because of its boxed amplifier stages and beautiful red filter capacitors, but it is not: The CX-1 has gold plated ground rails, a very refined power supply and components of the highest quality. The CD-input has it's own power supply and is switched by a relay. And it does not have the cheap, corrosion prone input selector switches of the C-2x.
The German magazine "Stereoplay" rated the CX-1 "absolute top class", better than the C-2x, which gained only "top class" years before.
IMHO the low acceptance of the CX-1 comes from it's unattractive look.

Yes, we have recently compared my rebuilt A-1 with my A-S2000. Everybody liked the A-1 more while listening to vinyl with MM cartridges (AT-20Sla and AT-25).
BTW, the A-1 outperformed an Accuphase E-406.
While the A-S2000 was a bit cleaner the A-1 was more involving esp. with female vocals. Some also preferred the bass performance of the A-1. The MC input is not so usable because of its 10 Ohms input impedance, which is much too low for modern MC cartridges, at least for my AT-33PTG.
For CD reproduction the A-S/CD-S 2000 combo was winner, maybe because of the symmetrical connection.
 
Well, the C-2x sound not as involving as the CX-1. This is not my opinion only, but all my friends do have the same impression. Both sound clean but the CX-1 is more "musical".
If you look inside both preamps the CX-1 is a completely different construction. You have to look closer look because at the first glance the C-2x looks more like an "high end" product because of its boxed amplifier stages and beautiful red filter capacitors, but it is not: The CX-1 has gold plated ground rails, a very refined power supply and components of the highest quality. The CD-input has it's own power supply and is switched by a relay. And it does not have the cheap, corrosion prone input selector switches of the C-2x.
The German magazine "Stereoplay" rated the CX-1 "absolute top class", better than the C-2x, which gained only "top class" years before.
IMHO the low acceptance of the CX-1 comes from it's unattractive look.


Just received my CX-1 this morning. Looks really great, no markings anywhere. I would rate it 9.8/10 cosmetically.

Hooked it up to my rig, and now I know why Dr Ear prefers it more than the c-2x.

I only listen to cd's and it is as good as my adcom preamp. Remember, my adcom has been fully modded, and the cx-1 seems original under the bonnet after taking a quick look.

I can only imagine how much better the cx-1 will be by replacing those tired by now 15 year old electrolytics.

Very excited with my purchase, this is truly an extremely high end preamp,up there with the best of them, and maybe the last preamp I will ever need to buy.

CX-1/MX-2000. A perfect match made in heaven. Could not be happier!

Adcom gfp-565 to be sold on ebay very soon.
 
Last edited:
If you look inside both preamps the CX-1 is a completely different construction. You have to look closer because at the first glance the C-2x looks more like an "high end" product because of its boxed amplifier stages and beautiful red filter capacitors, but it is not: The CX-1 has gold plated ground rails, a very refined power supply and components of the highest quality. The CD-input has it's own power supply and is switched by a relay. And it does not have the cheap, corrosion prone input selector switches of the C-2x.
The German magazine "Stereoplay" rated the CX-1 "absolute top class", better than the C-2x, which gained only "top class" years before.
IMHO the low acceptance of the CX-1 comes from it's unattractive look.

Yes, we have recently compared my rebuilt A-1 with my A-S2000. Everybody liked the A-1 more while listening to vinyl with MM cartridges (AT-20Sla and AT-25).
BTW, the A-1 outperformed an Accuphase E-406.

I agree, the cd replay through the cx-1 is phenomenal.

When the cx-1 and c-2x are compared side by side, those who prefer the sound of the c-2x is likely they are comparing the phono stages only with vinyl playback.
The phono stage of the cx-1 is pretty ordinary.

But most people have moved on from the vintage days of vinyl replay.

I personally have transferred all my LP's to cd, and they sound just the same as I remember them on vinyl.
We are in the 21'st Century, and better for it. I have said goodbye to the 70's vinyl era.

Yamaha back in the 90's when designing the cx-1, look like they concentrated more on the CD circuitry section than the antiquated phono section, and came up with one of the best preamps for cd replay.

I would now rate the cx-1 as the best ever preamp Yamaha ever produced for cd replay, after the cx10000 of course.
I think I am one of the very few in Australia who now owns a CX-1.I could not recall ever seeing one on ebay Australia ever since I started looking specifically for Yamaha equipment about 8 years ago.

I am not surprised the A1 beat the Accuphase E-406.
Accuphase are only highly sought after for their brilliant looks and build quality.
But there are many lesser brands like Yamaha that often beat Accuphase sonically.
Yamaha is equivalent to a Camry, and Accuphase is equivalent to a Mercedes.

Mercedes has the looks and class on the outside., but the Toyota under the bonnet is more reliable, and does the job better than the Mercedes, day after day.

My Yamaha CA1000 easily sounded better than an E-303 not long ago in an A/B comparison.

My A1 was not compared to the E-303, I did not want to totally embarass the owner and to make him have a heart attack after the big bucks he spent on the purchase and recapping of his wonderful looking Accuphase integrated.

Brands like Yamaha, Sansui, Marantz, Sony, Kenwood.Technics,Pioneer and others in the 70' and 80's made some wonderful TOTL separates that would more than hold their own with many high end separates of today.
 
Last edited:
congrats on the CX-1, I was quite sure it would go well with the MX-2000.

I did not know you had a C-2x, I thought you where asking about it? But any way, as I said if you don't play vinyl you don't need to hunt the C-2x.

Regarding the use of Mercedes as equal to Accuphase, I think manny at the Accuphase headquaters will be extremly happy. The Mercedes disel car has for manny manny years been regarded as the most relible car ever to set rubber on this planet. They had some problems from mid 90's to early 2000, but with 84 years of car building on the back it seems ok to have a few bad years.

This is what Wiki sayes about the Mercedes quality (and Toyota):
Quality

Since its inception, Mercedes-Benz had maintained a reputation for its quality and durability. Objective measures looking at passenger vehicles - such as J.D. Power surveys, demonstrated a downturn in reputation in this criteria in the late 1990s and early 2000s. By mid-2005, Mercedes temporarily returned to the industry average for initial quality, a measure of problems after the first 90 days of ownership, according to J.D. Power.[6] In J.D. Power's Initial Quality Study for the first quarter of 2007, Mercedes showed dramatic improvement by climbing from 25th to 5th place, surpassing quality leader Toyota, and earning several awards for its models.[7] For 2008, Mercedes-Benz's initial quality rating improved by yet another mark, now in fourth place.[8] On top of this accolade, it also received the Platinum Plant Quality Award for its Mercedes’ Sindelfingen, Germany assembly plant.

I really think they will be happy at Accuphase headquaters :)

PS. I have a Volvo, so not biased.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom