Dodd preamp vs. McCormack RLD-1 preamp

Mrjstark. The BENT is gone, and I will miss it -- the best passive I have heard after trying 4 or five of them, but I don't like equipment on the sidelines. A very recommended piece for the "right" system.

I love the Dodd for sound, but the looks don't hurt. Your right about the JJ - no problem as far as I can tell, but tube rolling is one of the "pleasures" of tube pres versus passive or SS - more fun and games.

If I prefer the Dodd to some degree over the BENT and other passives, it is proabably due to the BAM (bass augmentation module) used by my Merlin speakers that goes between source and pre - and according to Bobby (Mr. Merlin) the BAM sound best with a tube buffer and with the Dodd 200ohm out put (yeah!)it bufferes very well indeed and can proabably drive any cable/amp load. I'll comment again when I get the Amperexes, though those JJs are not bad at all.

Phd said: "I don't blame you for wanting to sell the Audio Research LS3. This is the only preamp from Audio Research I never could warm up to. If your looking to stay with a ss pre, the McCormack Platinum RLD-1 will literally smoke the LS3!"

The only reason I am considering selling my 16 yr. old LS3 is because I want remote volume control. I do NOT want to get rid of the sound...I love the sound of the LS3, in fact I have the RLD-1 in my system now to audition and quite the contrary, I think the LS3 smokes the RLD-1. The RLD-1 is very detailed, borderline etched with a fairly planar soundstage. Also it seems a bit bass shy. I plan to leave it connected for a few more days before I pull the plug on it though. I am really intrigued by the possibilities the RLD-1 may have with the Steve McCormack mods. That however is a $1400 roll of the dice. I have his DNA 0.5 Delux amp and I like it alot. He seems to really know how to design amplifiers and the mods for the RLD-1 involve cost-no-object parts...a more sophisticated volume control and replacement of the power supply, and several other things.

I find your comment about the LS3 being the only ARC preamp you didn't like interesting since way back in the mid 90's Stereophile put it on their recommended A list (as I recall).

Now keep in mind, I am an old fart and no doubt have tin ears so take all this with a grain of salt.

Mrjstark,

Thanks for providing your take on the RWA Isabella versus the Dodd. I added the RWA 30.2 integrated to my system back in May and have been very pleased with it. I have been contemplating adding the Dodd or RWA preamp also and am most interested in how these two compare in depth of sound stage. Could you please comment?

Pubul57,

I tried running my 30.2 directly from my CDP, but found the soundstage a bit flat. Putting my PLC Sonic Euphoria (autoformers) in line increased the depth. It also, to my ears, significantly improved impact and added some welcome texture (i.e. "weight") to the sound (better impedance matching due to the transformers??). How does the soundstage depth of the Dodd compare to the Tapp?

Thanks

Hi Nanotweeter

Here are some links to the shoot-out (pics and comments)

Pictures from the "Rave"

comparison/first impressions

It is not much but better then nothing. :)

It's not easy to recommend one over the other.
Price difference, features , sex appeal, sound characteristics and your preferences will mostly dictate the decision making.

Sound-stage among the other attributes like beautiful rendition of music performed by Isabella, air, balance and articulation were the reasons for me to rethink my priorities and decide to go with RWA.
Dodd is still in my system and while I hate to let it go, just like Pubul57 - can't keep them both. Listening to Dodd in the last few days were just as enjoyable as when I first hook it up to my system. In my opinion, it is a hell of a bargain for what it does and it is an easy recommendation since sonically, it's very transparent and somewhat neutral. Isabella on the other hand does image better then Dodd and soundstage is also painted with more masterful brush. Width and depth is wider, deeper and instruments as well as vocal(s) are in the correct scale/size , placement with believable presence. Subtle details, ambiance/ambient and inner character of the performers are simply stunning with Isabella (with DAC).

There is a price to pay to get that last refinements and it might be just to much for some. But Dodd will get you there a lot closer then any other preamp that I have heard.....in that price range (but not only).

Regards
Mariusz

I think soundstage depth is comparable, but the Dodd seems a bit wider. What is more noticeable to my is the slightly better dynamics of the active - but this is hair splitting -the BENT in the right system works very well in most audio regards. I think the move from passive resistor to tvc/avc is much bigger that the difference between the BENT and the Dodd. I suspect tube rolling will also take the Dodd in different directions.