2. amps-preamps
  3. 192328-89294

What is Moving From Solid State to Quicksilver Mid Monos Like?

Hello to all!

I currently have a McCormack DNA125 modified / upgraded in a manor similar to what McCormack does.  It is fine sounding, but I have a curiosity (itch?) about what

I would experience if I moved to a pair of the current Quicksilver mid mono amplifiers.  Can anyone out there who has made a move from good SS equipment

to the mid monos tell me what they gained that made them happier with the sound?

Thanks in advance!

fastcat95
bojack
656 posts
 

Fastcat95,

In a huge coincidence, I am the third person in this thread to also move from a DNA-125 to Mid Monos. I also used Frieds (A3s) with my Mid Monos as well as Spendor 1/2s, and sadly these amps (paired with the QS linestage and using really nice EL34s) were just too lean for me in the bass and mids compared to the DNA-125. They were also a bit grainy in the highs in my set-up. I solved that problem by eventually moving to the Mono 120s, which I still use now using KT120s and Gold Lion small tubes. I also own KT Monos using Mike's stock KT-88s (Chinese) with RCA NOS 12AX7s and EH12BH7s...absolutely superb amps that are far better than the Mid Monos, imo, in every area. Looking back, maybe I should have tried some KT88s in my Mid Monos to fatten them up some. If you want to jump to Quicksilvers, I suggest starting with KT88s or KT120s if the power transformers are up to it. If too lean, you can easily sell them and then grab a pair of KT Monos or Mono 120s, which kick the DNA-125's butt up and down the street! 

Post removed 
fastcat95 OP
39 posts
 
bojack:  I think I knew a guy who had the Fried A3 with CJ tube gear, and it sounded impressive for a modest 2-way dynamic system.

As to your comparison of the DNA125 with the QS monos; was your DNA125 stock, or was it modded like the ones that Steve McCormack does?  The modded version is definitely a step beyond the stock amplifier, and to an extent that I am cautious about the idea of switching to tubes.  I suspect that the differences between the modded DNA125 and the QS amplifiers might be subtle.

 

decooney
2,200 posts
 

@fastcat95 "...(.75" tweeter, and dual V.C. 6.5" bass mids). 89 dB sensitivity; impedance probably drops to 4-6 ohms" "...what do you think???"

 

My friend has a similar speaker configuration and spec, slightly more sensitive than yours, similar impedance - running with his QS Mid-Monos. His former high power amp w/EL34s drove his speakers a little better, more bottom end. It’s fine for low volume, but when he needs to turn it up a little more - having the separate/extra subwoofer helps quite a bit. As noted before, he is back to looking for more efficient speakers in order to keep the Mid Mono amps instead.

If you truly want a more comparable step-up move with tubes coming from your DNA 125, keeping your existing speakers, I’d say skip the lovely lower power QS Mid-Monos and go with the newer KT Monos -or- one of the prior generation amps in the 60-90w range. For ref - several prior products are listed here to keep an eye out for used market fwiw. Others here might chime in too. I think at least the former Mono 60s or Mono 80s would do the trick I’d bet. They pop up 2nd hand periodically https://quicksilveraudio.com/past-products/

 

 

 

bojack
656 posts
 

Hi Fastcat,

My DNA-125 was all stock, and yes, I agree that that amp in stock or modded form is an all around better option that Mid Monos. Though I did not have that amp for long, I did enjoy it, but the higher power QSs sound more like music to my ears. Btw, the Mid Monos have had 2-3 different iterations:

V1: Beefy output transformer, small power transformer, and one bias adjust pot.

V2: Two small transformers and one bias adjust pot.

V3: Beefy power transformer, small output transformer, and 2 bias adjust pots (this is his latest version I believe).

V3 allows for better bias matching and tube life, which is ideal imo.

 

More to discover