TAD 150

Arni-
One more thing. As someone, maybe you, posted in the other thread, in this price range, with tubes, I may sacrafice some extension in the lows and some resolution/detail in the highs. Do you think that's the case with the TAD. The guy who owns one thinks not and the guy selling me his thinks not. One of the things I love about the McCormack/Vandersteen combo, is the tight, deep bass. I would hate to lose that.

FYI-the TAD-150 that I'm getting is the upgraded model, not the standard.

Yes Ecruz, it was I who posted that tubes would lose bass definition. But it is also somewhat of a generalization, where this is not so much the case for more expensive good tube preamps. TAD has the advantage of being a "modded" design with higher parts quality that most standard production $1500 preamps, and I think it may indeed be an improvement over your MF3cr in all areas. If I were in your shoes, I would go for it. I am looking at the TAD myself as an upgrade from SS pre, and I would really want to know if you do jump on it-and what your impressions would be.
Have fun,
Arni

I plan on buying it. It may be a week or two until I get it, but I'll post back with impressions.

E-

ECRUZ,

Eagleman here. No bass loss with my TAD/ McCormack combo but, I had the DNA-1. I am getting the TAD-60 to replace the McCormack. I am told that the TAD-60 bass rivals the McCormack by the person who originally reviewed the TAD-60. Don't know if it was the right decision but, I had the itch to try a tube amp and the deal that I am getting was hard to ignore. Stay tuned for my review in a few weeks after break in...

Eagleman-
Keep us posted.

I won't be giving up my McCormack any time soon. If I need to upgrade, it will go back to Steve McCormack for one of his improvements.

I'm very interested to see how the tubes sound. The only other time I tried tubes was many years ago, with lesser equipment. That's where my impression of loose bass and constrained highs comes from.