2. amps-preamps
  3. 1179939807

MC TRANSFORMERS VS TUBE PRE PRE

Has anyone here had much experience comparing mc step-up transformers vs. tube pre pre amps? Several things conspired together to cause me to send my Counterpoint SA-5.1 to Alta Vista in order to have the Sowter 8055 transformers installed. I own a Counterpoint SA-2 pre pre amp which was simply magical with the SA-5.1. Unfortunatly, my SA-2 broke and then my listening room was flooded out (thus the conspiring events). When my listening room flooded, I decided to take the "opportunity" of my music downtime to send the 5.1 back to Mike and have the Sowter mc transformers installed as an "upgrade" and then not have to worry about having the SA-2 repaired. After all, the Sowters' were supposed to far superior to the SA-2 and it would remove a bunch of tubes from my system by replacing the SA-2. Well, my listening room was fixed from the flood and slowly my system came back together again. When I installed the SA-5.1 back into the system with the Sowters' now in place, I was bummed to say the least. The magic was gone. In its place was a homogenized, dumbed-down version of what my LPs used to sound like. Had I not known any better (i.e.; I didn't know what information was really on my records), I would think the Sowters' sounded really good. However, I do know better. My question to the forum is does anyone else have any experience going from a quality tube pre pre and switching to transformers? I don't mean to pick on Sowters' in particular, they are just what I have installed and Mike feels they are the best of breed. I am beginning to think that the problem lies in using any mc transformer. At this time my SA-2 is in route back to Alta Vista to be fixed. I am going to send my SA-5.1 back and have the Sowters' removed and my phono stage restored to the way it was. I want the magic back that I had. And the magic that I am speaking of is the difference between your system sounding like live musicans are playing in front of you with all of the dynamics that implies vice having a system that sounds very "nice" in the usual audiophile sense that would impress people who didn't know better. For the record, my system consists of the VPI TNT MKIII with the new 300 RPM motor, ET-2 tonearm, Denon 103R cartridge which replaced my Van den Hul MC-2 special which it simply smokes, Counterpoint SA-5.1 pre, and Quicksilver MS-190 amp on the main speakers. I have a DBX electronic crossover that feeds a pair of Denon POA 6600A monoblocks for the subs. My speakers are my own designs. They are all (main speakers and subs) 1/4 wavelength transmission lines. Bottom line is that before I ever take another blind alley on "upgrades," I want someone to come to my house and show me that what they have is better. For the here and now, I would step over all of the mc transformers out there in order to get my hands on a SA-2. And if anyone has heard another pre pre that bests the SA-2, please let me know what it is. One last tid bit. If you have a British copy of the Beatles lp Abbey Road, listen to the beginning of Sun King. Let me know if you can hear Ringo hitting the cymbals with a mallet, and if you can hear pressure waves coming off each of those strikes with differing dynamics. If the answer is no, it just sounds like cymbals being hit, you are in the "missing information" catagory which is where I am currently back to with mc transformers.
mepearson
thekong
203 posts
 
Hi Mepearson,

Thanks for the detail reply. When you get back he SA5.1 with the MC transformer removed, I would be very interested to know how does it compared to the original unit before the upgrade.

Thanks in advance.

Michael
nkj
130 posts
 
Hi, I used the classic combo of an ARC SP-8 and Counterpoint SA-2 for almost 20yrs.

Both my mint SA-2 and SP-8 are sitting on the shelf gathering dust. They are great pieces that hold their own today, if a bit noisy...the noise can be managed though.

This is a great debate active vs. passive for low level phono. I tried transformers and always went back to an active device. The SA-2 was "the" pre-preamp in its day..until most designers went xfrmrs for ease and to avoid the pitfalls of poor active design at such low signal levels. The Aesthetix IO sig is my replacement...but for musicality and enjoyment the old combo still is very impressive.

Nkj
gofast
19 posts
 
I've only briefly tried Jensen stepups (I use them with a 2nd TT for background listening), and definately prefer my ARC MCP33 or Music Ref RM4 over the Jensen (going into an upgraded ARC PH3). The MCP33 is more musical than the RM4, while the RM4 is quieter than the MCP33.

However, by getting an ARC LS5/II preamp, with the PH3, I now have enough gain that I've taken the MCP33 out of the system, and that sounds the best!

I'll take the tube hiss over the flatness of the Jensens.
mepearson OP
100 posts
 
Awesome responses guys! I can see a preference starting to emerge from those that love the sound of music that transformers can't compete on sonics with an active head amp, they only offer reduced noise. I would love to hear the MCP33 along side the SA-2.
gregadd
574 posts
 
it is somewhat unfair to compare transformers to preamps with which they were never designed to compete. they were disigned to compete with another add on device a pre-preamp. imo they x-former beat it hands down. Given the length of existence of the low output m/c there is no excuse for a modern preamp not to have sufficient gain for m/c. If the preamp does not have sufficient gain i still think the x-former is the way to go.
More to discover