What qualities stand out in really good solid state preamps?

@hilde45 

Having long wanting to do comparison of top notch solid state pre to my Coincident Statement (MkII upgrade, along with some of my own mods) I recently purchased Pass XP22. I had a chance to extensively compare the two, and experimented with various platforms, footers, power cords, IC's, in other words voiced Pass for best performance with my setup.

 

So, my final analysis after 3 months comparison. The only two area in which the Pass excelled over Coincident was slightly more extension on top and occasionally I had the sense of slightly more details at certain frequencies, such as words being more easily discernible on some recordings, this not consistent? In spite of this I never thought the Pass to be more resolving or having a lower noise floor. And the easily heard superior transparency of the Coincident trumped whatever advantage Pass may have had there. Its like information vs sense of real live performers in room. As others have mentioned tube vs ss sound staging and imaging also differ, Coincident had more air around performers, this along with precise image placement, Pass did this very well, just sharper outlines around performers. They were aprox. equal in sound stage  and image size, both first rate. I actually preferred the bass from Coincident, more tuneful while remaining articulate, bass was perhaps the most problematic issue I had with Pass, really had to experiment with platforms, footers and power cords to approach bass performance of Coincident. One note or sense of thudding, inarticulate bass was there with certain setups, have to say I brought this under control with correct setup, still never quite on par with Coincident. As for tonality, timbre, Pass really close to replicating Coincident in ability to humanize recordings, I can't imagine any SS doing this better than the Pass. I believe this has long been one of the aspects of Pass equipment that people rave about, I concur.

 

All in all, at the end I was quite taken by the Pass, in the context of a SS unit. I've not had much success with SS since getting into SET amps and pre's. For me the minimalist approach of small parts count, boutique parts voiced for my particular setup,  and point to point wiring provide a transparency or performers in room sensation I can't get with either push pull tube or SS amps and pre's.

 

In presentation, Pass took me to recording venue, Coincident brings performers into my room. Again, I'd say this more SET vs SS in my particular setup vs. tubes vs SS in general. Based on my recollection of past non SET tube pre's I've owned the Pass outperformed them in probably every parameter other than 3D imaging, sense of air around individual images that tubes in general do so well.

 

Pass also excelled in build quality, massive and solid, well organized circuit boards, soldering top notch, I'd expect great reliability. While this may sound like faint praise, I'd evaluate the Pass as really top notch SS pre, I could see it being preferable to tube pre's in some systems.

 

 

It is a course a very worthy question.. like finding words for wine…you may never taste or describing the imagined swing of a fine Bespoke English double…. before a first hunt….

I might add dynamic relief, attack, slam, immediacy, air around harmonics ( especially in the bass - think Starker Cello - the ability to pick out individual voices in mass chorale, to discern the long reverberant space of the venue , how high can the triangles float ? Do i hear those and more in both an ARC and Ayre pre, sure…and in Keiths best work. Charlie like Keith a no negative feedback and time and phase , low resonance..listen and measure guy….

have fun on the quest.

 

hilde45 OP

I haven’t been in an audio showroom for many, many years, know nothing about current equipment, which is why I talk about features, advantages of .... and specifically mention only equipment I have owned or close friends have owned. Thus I sound like a broken record, mocking bird repeating ....

I never fully trusted showroom or audio show imperfect comparisons back in the day except to get a general sense of things, what to risk some money on.

Audio shop in Brooklyn Heights, late 60’s, did the best, they rolled each speaker from big room down the hall into the listening room (no cones of other speakers in the room), comparisons by memory, but outstanding/involving was instantly obvious.

TUBES

I have inherited/owned and like Vintage tube preamps and amps, and hear differences, but usually they are using different tubes somewhere, so not true/direct comparisons. I test my own tubes, test friends tubes, give friends tubes from my collection of new/mostly used pulls that test good, never a direct comparison. I buy quad matched, test them when received, then after a while truly matched? I check everything annually just before thanksgiving.

Fisher 80 az tube mono blocks (used a few different tube types) EL37’s originally.

Fisher Receivers, 500C (3) and 800c (500c with am tuner added)

Cayin A88T (current in main system) (had to sound as good as my Fisher 80az mono blocks). They do, and I changed 6550s to KT88s, prefer them. Had Steve at VAS re-bias them (A88T m1 needed for 16 ohm taps for Vintage 16 ohm speakers. m1 bias adjustment is internal)

I use a Little Luxman 10 wpc tube integrated in my office, never compared to anything, sounds great driving my restored Vintage AR-2ax speakers. Sources: Vintage TT; Vintage R2R; Modern PC/usb out/DAC.

My friends mostly have tube equipment, in their systems, several things especially speakers and the room make differences.

.......................................

SS

I was given a McIntosh SS mc2250. Picked up and took straight to Harvey's 45th street, NYC (McIntosh Lab Day, I had made an appointment). McIntosh tested, said ’unusual specimen, accurate to 305 wpc’, 1 led out, mailed it to me, I changed it. Drove JSE Infinite Slope Model 2’s with it for years.It was designed to ’do nothing’, and that’s exactly what it did to my ears. It was the speakers that were outstanding.

At that time I compared 3 amps with 3 sets of color coded speaker wires (all home made cat 5), with WBT locking Bananas for myself and friends.

Fisher 500c tube receiver; Fisher 80az mono blocks; McIntosh SS2250, all thru the very revealing JSE’s

I also had the same content: CD; LP; 4 track Reel to Reel, pre-recorded.

EVERYONE picked LP over CD, and R2R over LP.

EVERYONE picked Tubes over SS, mono blocks generally, not always preferred to 500c receiver.

I had/have zero hum, however it wasn’t always a perfect volume match, that influences things as you know.

Yamaha SS CR-1020 Receiver for Garage/Shop system. It sounds darn good, now driving my other pair of restored AR-2ax speakers in the garage, a variety of small speakers in the shop..

It replaced prior Tandberg SS TR-1080, which I think had the most unique SS sound of any SS I have owned, wonderful sound driving a variety of speakers, two sets for garage and shop.

Never directly compared (Tandberg was not functioning, Yamaha is a big heavy beast).

so, no, I have not directly compared SS amps directly.

....................................

Vintage, lacking remote control,

Is why I keep recommending the Chase RLC-1, especially remote volume and remote balance. I use 3 currently

Main: sources to tube preamp; preamp to Chase (volume and balance); Chase to Integrated.

Office: remote power only (Luxman physical power button stays on)

Garage Shop: thru tape loop for in/out comparison, never a difference as has been true for many many years.

• tone - must be natural 
• dynamic range - must be able to sound laid back and gentle but scale up to explosive forces fast, as fast as demanded by the recording 
• low noise floor
• Texture in the bass
• warm and palpable mids
• extended and sweet highs
• nice, non-clicking silent volume control (want to be able to adjust volume without hearing any clicking or other artifacts)
• must image well and create a realistic and colorful soundstage

These are the attributes are what I look for in an amp, except the clicking volume.

I have 2 great preamp volume controls and like the clicking one the best. Though a smooth heavy wheel volume control is luxurious.

BTW - The new SimAudio North Collection seems to have a very advanced remote volume.

Friends bring their tube phono; tube preamp; cartridges to hear on my system they are familiar with, We patch them in: compare to my tube preamp/amp, speakers the same, cables the same except their 1 set of interconnects. Occasionally we use a pair of my interconnects.

Cartridges: my TT81 can play with all 3 tonearms in play with no concern regarding ’drag’. I simply change the input on the SUT and perhaps the PASS for MM, or one of the 4 optional x factors. Also you need to have a sense of where to adjust the Cayin’s volume while on mute (I make temporary pencil marks). Tonearms remain in play so location in the program has not changed.

We hear differences, discuss them, good experience.

Jim brought 3 Beatle albums, both MONO and STEREO versions. We had a good time listening.

1st impression: MONO: you are more involved with the words/song’s lyrics. Stereo next: you are more involved with the sound, imaging, good or bad engineering.

Of course, once you know the words/lyrics, then you enjoy the STEREO version more than 1st listen.

DEFINITELY playing MONO with a true MONO Cartridge is much better than playing Mono with a Stereo cartridge, even if your preamp has a mono mode.

ANY vertical movement, dust, scuffs, dirt in bottom of grooves, slight warps is picked up as noise by the stereo cartridge, then, using preamp’s Mono Mode, that ’noise’ is DOUBLED!