WTD maybe: best of all worlds pre amp

[montesquieu]

I've gotta say I am glad you have ditched the EAR, Tom. After a short initial positive feeling with the EAR 868PL I owned I soon grew to realise it wasn't that great. What it lacked was any degree of liveliness and engagement. It was just a bit bland when it really boiled down to it. For my tastes, anyway.

The Audiopax system I head in Rio was anything but bland. Lively, engaging and high resolution for sure.

Tougher call than you'd think Justin. The phono stage on it is excellent, indeed in my view (formed from quite a lot of trialling stuff) comparable to anything out there at the full asking price of the whole preamp - it's a superbly implemented LCR design. But in the end I was bypassing the SUTs (because I preferred my Miyajima ETR-Stereo and ETR-Mono ones) and bypassing the linestage, taking the phono from the tape out - so it made no sense to keep it. It took the Allnic H7000V (not cheap) to beat the internal phono stage .... what really impressed was how well the EAR's internal phono fed the various preamps I tried, it was the opposite of a bottleneck, it was always really clear what the preamp was doing (or not doing) to such a high-quality phono output.

I agree that the EAR 912 linestage is not quite at the level of the phono stage - it is a bit dry and studio-ish - though some people do like it that way and it can be to some extent modified by valve choices. But as an overall package, it took me more than six months of heavy auditioning to find a combo of separates to beat it.

[Lawrence001]

That's a generous offer, but London is a tad too far. I didnt think about this pre amp at one stage but was put off by a less than glowing repair report I saw on line, it implied to me that the build quality was poor and they needed local fettling, which I suspect you have done. I will try to find it when I have a minute. But if you think better than a dcb1 it might be worth the effort

It has a few quirks and I meant to update my thread on it, will try and do it tonight once the children are asleep.

[Lawrence001]

Depends on the DCB1 you're using id suggest.

Your DCB1, if it's my first one, is not as good as the one I use now. Better choices made in important resistor locations, better choices made all over actually, and also running at 1.2A rather than the 200mA I think that one is?

Unless the one compared to the XS was of this spec, I wouldn't read anything into the comparison personally.

Also, if the XS is a Valve pre, I'd bet my house that distortion figures are higher with the XS than with a DCB1, so it's highly unlikely that it's more transparent in ultimate terms.

Not trying to piss on anyone's choices of kit, but facts are facts.

You may actually prefer the XS depending on what you like listening to. Harmonics are very pleasant on the ear and I understand that, as I enjoy them myself.

Whatever you choose will be the right choice in the end.

I'm happy to call it perceived transparency, I at least partly agree with most or all of your points. I just go on what works well to my ears in my system at the time, and it has changed a bit since I tried your first DCB1, so comparisons are far from perfect.

[Bigman80]

I'm happy to call it perceived transparency, I at least partly agree with most or all of your points. I just go on what works well to my ears in my system at the time, and it has changed a bit since I tried your first DCB1, so comparisons are far from perfect.

Yep, no worries on my side.

Whatever works, is the right piece. That's always my advice.

[User211]

Tougher call than you'd think Justin. The phono stage on it is excellent, indeed in my view (formed from quite a lot of trialling stuff) comparable to anything out there at the full asking price of the whole preamp - it's a superbly implemented LCR design. But in the end I was bypassing the SUTs (because I preferred my Miyajima ETR-Stereo and ETR-Mono ones) and bypassing the linestage, taking the phono from the tape out - so it made no sense to keep it. It took the Allnic H7000V (not cheap) to beat the internal phono stage .... what really impressed was how well the EAR's internal phono fed the various preamps I tried, it was the opposite of a bottleneck, it was always really clear what the preamp was doing (or not doing) to such a high-quality phono output.

I agree that the EAR 912 linestage is not quite at the level of the phono stage - it is a bit dry and studio-ish - though some people do like it that way and it can be to some extent modified by valve choices. But as an overall package, it took me more than six months of heavy auditioning to find a combo of separates to beat it.

As a point of note I definitely think my Trichord Diablo and NCPSU was better than the 868 phono stage.

I know the 868PL isn't the same as the 912 in terms of phono stage but I believe the line stage is for all intents the same.

The weekest link in my system should be the far cheaper Chinese Cayin pre, but I much prefer it to the EAR. I wonder whether it's the valve rectification that helps it sound as good as it does. There probably is better out there for my tastes, though. I need to experiment more.

I never seem that keen on valve phono stages but I definitely like valve preamps. That said I have never been as serious as you about vinyl and just haven't experimented with very high end valve phono stages.

I hold out high hopes for that Audiopax. I am not sure which one Silvio had hooked up when I was there as it was in another room. I will email him.

[montesquieu]

As a point of note I definitely think my Trichord Diablo and NCPSU was better than the 868 phono stage.

I know the 868PL isn't the same as the 912 in terms of phono stage but I believe the line stage is for all intents the same.

The weekest link in my system should be the far cheaper Chinese Cayin pre, but I much prefer it to the EAR. I wonder whether it's the valve rectification that helps it sound as good as it does. There probably is better out there for my tastes, though. I need to experiment more.

I never seem that keen on valve phono stages but I definitely like valve preamps. That said I have never been as serious as you about vinyl and just haven't experimented with very high end valve phono stages.

I hold out high hopes for that Audiopax. I am not sure which one Silvio had hooked up when I was there as it was in another room. I will email him.

There's a lot of disinformation about, even on EAR dealers' web sites and in some of the older reviews. The phono stages in the 868pl and 88PB are FET/tube hybrids with two valves, and are a completely different design to the phono stage in the 912 which has no FET and three tubes - all valve (plus the inductors of course as it's an LCR stage).

However, it woudn't surprise me if the line stage was also different between the 912 and 868 ... it may possibly the same circuit but I doubt the output transformers are the same (not even sure the 868 uses output transformers?), my understanding is that the 912 was made to be unique for example the four SUT options are labelled the same as the stand-alone EAR MC4, but some of the ratios are different.

Well the Audiopax is indeed quite something, it takes a lot to get me to order a bit of kit brand new, serial cheapskate that I try my best to be.

[User211]

From Enjoy The Music. This tallies with other accounts I have seen.

"According to EAR, the $7595 model 868 has essentially the same circuitry and sound as its big brother, the Professional 912 preamplifier. The difference is that the 868 lacks some of the flexibility and features like the D'Arsonval meters of the Pro 912. The preamplifier is a transformer coupled input and output device and that it contains four tubes. The tube compliment includes the PCC88/7DJ8, which is an equivalent to the more common United States spec 6922 miniature dual triodes. Two of the PCC88 tubes are used within the line stage and two more are in the phono amplifier stage. We are told the phono stage is exactly the same as the circuit used in the separate standalone $4995 EAR 88PB."

[montesquieu]

From Enjoy The Music. This tallies with other accounts I have seen.

"According to EAR, the $7595 model 868 has essentially the same circuitry and sound as its big brother, the Professional 912 preamplifier. The difference is that the 868 lacks some of the flexibility and features like the D'Arsonval meters of the Pro 912. The preamplifier is a transformer coupled input and output device and that it contains four tubes. The tube compliment includes the PCC88/7DJ8, which is an equivalent to the more common United States spec 6922 miniature dual triodes. Two of the PCC88 tubes are used within the line stage and two more are in the phono amplifier stage. We are told the phono stage is exactly the same as the circuit used in the separate standalone $4995 EAR 88PB."

Exactly. Total bollocks. How can it be exactly the same circuit when in it uses two tubes and a FET,rather than three tubes and no FET? The line stage may or may not be the same I have no knowledge of that.

Pretty poor show really and demonstrates that reviews, even in from the bigger sites, can't be trusted.

[montesquieu]

EAR 868PL




EAR 912:




Does that look like the same design to you?

[User211]

For the phono, no. For the line stage who knows. I'd need a circuit diagram.

I am missing something? ETM aren't saying the phono stage is the same as 912. I am not saying it is.

But ETM are claiming the info they have is from EAR.

Confused.