REFERENCE COMPONENTS-PREAMPLIFIERS

There has been only slow progress with preamplifiers (with phono stages) in the last 15 years, caused obviously by a continually dwindling demand. The best preamplifier of the 1980’s is still one of the very best 15 years later (though only with serious modifications). Most of the improvements have come about from the availability and use of superior passive parts (capacitors etc.).

Still, the 1990’s gave us the first great high-gain preamplifier, and even the next best models are still superior to all but one of the best of the 1980’s. The real problem now is the pathetic lack of choice compared to the past. Much of this "lack of choice" is caused by the mainstream audio magazines policy of ignoring small manufacturers who are producing some interesting designs, and at reasonable prices. Readers will have to mainly rely on their own efforts to search out these components. Any we find will be eventually discussed here.

Note- For Reference dedicated phono stages, see their own separate file.

The inclusion, and description, of each tube preamplifier (and tube phono stage and tube amplifier) assumes that high-quality tubes are being used in the signal path. That usually means New Old Stock tubes (NOS). This is especially true of "small signal" tubes, 12AX7 or 6SN7 etc.

There is some news (from Vacuum Tube Valley) that good small signal tubes are actually being made today, mainly in China, but I haven't been able to verify that yet. The bottom line here is that the owners of these components should never compromise their sonic performance with modern and inferior tubes. Good tubes are the best investment for long-term satisfaction.

Fortunately, there are excellent "output" tubes (6550, EL-34, 300B etc.) currently being manufactured, mainly in Eastern Europe and Russia, plus, very recently, China.

I recently received a depressing letter from a reader who purchased a VTL Ultimate* preamplifier, on my advice, only to see it break down after a few months, with the required repairs too expensive to be economical, at least for this reader, who is in the tube elctronics business no less. So readers, please...

When you are buying an audio component used, especially an older tube unit from an unknown source, make certain there is some previous "feedback" or some resource if there are problems. Either that, or make sure the price you pay is low enough to allow you to still spend something to bring it up to top "stock" performance. (Modifications can come later.) Ideally, you should hear the component in your own system, and check it out personally, BEFORE the purchase. Fortunately, the nightmare this upset reader experienced is relatively rare, at least in our audio world, but always be careful before you make your commitment.

*This preamplifier is generally reliable, so I'm not trying to make an "example" out of it, but the reader informed me that the (VTL) factory won't be of any help (with schematics or parts lists), so be extra careful with it.

The Audio Quattro is the finest stock preamplifier ever made. Its phono stage can accommodate only low output moving coils, and its line-stage is just a cathode follower without any gain. It has the benefits of both simplicity of design and superb execution (with only 4 tubes in the entire signal path, a 4 chassis totally dual-mono construction and the power supplies use only polypropylene capacitors).

Once modified, this preamp has the extremely rare quality of both speed and precision along with a total sense of immediacy and completeness. It is extremely rare, so it is almost impossible to find used. The last retail price was $9,000 U.S.

The only other preamp ever made that is in its class is the Jadis JP-80 (and only if it is highly modified). Audion has a much less expensive model called the DUAL, which is the same basic design except it has two chassis and it's not hard-wired. I don’t know anyone who has heard it, but it should be almost as good for a lot less money.

GOOD NEWS!- Audion has announced that it has re-started production of the Quattro. According to an e-mail from Ray Lombardi of Ray of Sound, the North American importer-distributor of Audion tube electronic products:

"the Audion Quattro preamplifier is available in 2 versions, a 2-chassis model, and a 4-chassis model. The 2-chassis model will retail for $10,995, the 4-chassis model will retail for $15,995."

There is also now a separate Audion phono-stage. One reader purchased one based on this website's reference designation of the full preamplifier. He is very happy with it. We have no experience with this model.

Further- No one in my group has had any direct experience with the most recent version of this preamplifier. I did receive a letter from a reader who did have some experience with a Quattro, and even compared it to another one of the finest preamplifiers ever made. This is what he wrote to me:

"I am in possession of the very first reincarnated Audion Premier Quattro Moving Coil and Line Level 4 Chassis Pre-Amplifier to reach these shores. It has the only two upgrades available: Silver point to point wiring and stepped attenuators. The chassis colors are black and silver as opposed to the standard dark blue and silver. I tested it in my system against my Michael Elliott SA-9 (Magnum Opus Version) and Magnum Opus Line Stage combination. The Audion Quattro is a very fine performer. However, in my system, as it is now set up, I prefer the two Opus One Units."

"There was break-in time put on the unit at the factory and at the importer. We tried the unit with the stock tubes as well as with two different sets of NOS E88CC - Telefunken and Siemen. Briefly, the Audion had shortcomings compared to the Opus in bass energy below 60 Hz, and with dynamics, along with less extended upper frequency range. For the most part, I feel that the huge tube power supplies of the Magnum Opus, compared to the solid state power supplies of the Audion probably accounts for most of the differences. I will send you a much more detailed report later. The system includes the big Sound Labs, Walker turntable with Koetsu Onyx Platinum, and a special pair of Viva Auroras (Special Transformers through-out, transformer input, and 845/211 tubes) with Silent Source Cables."

While I am not in a position to verify his observations, I also have no legitimate reason to challenge either his competency or his veracity. Of course, the Audion is a currently available component, while the ultra-rare Magnum Opus model (a "dressed-up SA-9" according to Michael Elliott) must be found used.

These two preamplifiers are most likely the two finest that can be purchased "ready to use". However, based on my experiences, I still strongly believe that neither of them can equal a heavily modified Jadis JP-80 with an Expressive Technology SU-1 Transformer in its ability to capture the most basic essences of music, though they both will be superior to the Jadis/ET combo in other sonic parameters which are less important to me. 7/03

I have some important news concerning this Reference preamplifier. The price for a new Quattro* is now $ 16,000**, but there is also a version with all V-Cap Teflon capacitors in the signal-path. This option costs an extra $ 1,500** (parts and labor). Needless to say, I highly recommend anyone purchasing this unit to also add the V-Cap modification.

I have heard this new model, with the V-Cap modification, for many hours at an associate's home. This same associate also had the older Quattro, though it was heavily modified, including Rel Cap Teflon capacitors in the signal path. We both agree that this new model is noticeably superior in every way, even beyond the improvement obviously guaranteed just by the change in the coupling capacitors. At this time, we also both agree that this is the finest preamplifier we are aware of that you can purchase new***, at any price. Accordingly, it is the only preamplifier now in "Class A" that is currently being manufactured.

Further- I was just informed by one of my associates, who actually owns the first Audion Quattro built with V-Caps, that he also had the stock volume controls replaced with those made by Gold Point, using Vishay resisitors. They are $ 1,500 for the pair, but he claims that are absolutely necessary if you want to hear the full potential of this design.

*This has 4 chassis. There is also a 2 chassis version, which sells for $ 11,000, but we haven't heard it. The cost for the V-Cap Teflon modification is also $ 1,500.

**For further details, contact Ray Lombardi, of Ray of Sound, who is the North American importer of Audion. The website is: www.rayofsound.com

***The one other Class A Preamplifier is a used Jadis JP-80, with extensive modifications, and either a Bent Audio Silver, or an Expressive Technologies SU-1, moving coil transformer as a step-up.

The Jadis JP-80 is the only other full preamplifier ever made that is in the class of the Audion. However, there is a big difference, because the Jadis preamps require both extensive modifications and the Expressive Technology SU-1 to equal the Audion Quattro's performance when amplifying a phono signal. On the other hand, there are more JP-80s out there so they can be purchased used for a smaller initial expenditure.

Eventually, with the modifications and the SU-1, you will have an investment which will be about the same as the Quattro, with its own much simpler and cheaper modifications.

Each model has small theoretical and practical advantages over the other. There can’t be significant differences considering that both units are superb in every area of musical reproduction. However, based on extensive listening sessions with the Audion, in an associate's system that I am very familiar with, I am now certain that the Audion does not equal the Jadis in retaining low-level musical information. The Audion does have sonic advantages in other areas, but to me they are less important. So I still feel that the (modified) Jadis/ET combination is the ultimate way to go, as impractical as they are now to both find and then build.

What about the JP-80 "stock"? It would be, most likely, a lower "Class B" preamp in performance, and that ranking assumes that the (poor) MC stage was not being utilized.

Unless you have no choice, you should generally avoid the newer JP-80MC, since you won’t be using their mediocre moving-coil stage. You will need all the money you saved to gut and modify your JP-80 after the purchase. The most you should ever spend on any used JP-80, including the MC, is around $7,000, though this number may change depending on supply and demand.

Some JP-80s have no tubes in the power supply. Jadis took them out for a couple of years beginning around 1990. The preamplifier is faster and more precise without them, but it's also "drier". It's a very small difference, but it's still audible. They went back to using tubes after, I assume, complaints from customers and dealers.

I have received a number of requests to provide the details of the modifications I made to my reference JP-80. I have now began a Modification File. It will take some time to fully complete, but the most fundamental and noticeable modifications have now been posted.

The JP-80 is not their "top of the line" preamplifier. Jadis also makes the JP-200, which is the most expensive preamplifier I know of at $36,000. It’s a four chassis design, and has 9 (EF-86) tubes per channel; 3 each for the moving-coil, RIAA phono and line stages respectively. It looks like two JP-80's, one per channel. Because of its unusually large size, it can be very difficult to position it within typical cabinets. There could also be cable and grounding problems.

Then there are the sonics. Because it is quite rare, not many people have actually heard this component, but we are very lucky in this instance. Back in the early 1990's, just before I bought the Expressive Technology SU-1 Transformer, and while my own JP-80 was still almost pure stock, a good friend of mine purchased the JP-200 (he received a great deal, but he still paid big money).

He soon came over to my place to find out how much better it was then the JP-80. A couple of his friends tagged along, and a couple of my closest audiophile friends were also there. This was a "big event" at the time and a large number of people wanted to attend, but 6 audiophiles was the maximum I would allow in my room at one time (to avoid a "circus" atmosphere).

We ended up spending the entire afternoon comparing the two models. First we played my unit, since it was already "hooked up". Then we took everything apart and installed the JP-200. Then it was back to the JP-80 and then one last listen to the JP-200 (for final confirmation). The system, as I remember it was: Goldmund Studio modified/SME V, Dynavector XX-1*, Jadis JA-80's highly modified, Wilson Watts II modified, Entec top-of-the-line SW-2 subwoofers.

*This was an excellent high-output moving coil cartridge. The unique moving-coil stage of the JP-200 was not employed. If it had, the comparison would have been unfair and useless. Only the basic phono and line stages were used and compared.

Fortunately, there was total unanimity in what we all heard and what I now describe:

The JP-200 was slightly superior in 3 sonic elements. There was a small improvement in image size and focus, bass extension and dynamic shading. In the remaining sonic areas, the two preamplifiers were either equal or the JP-80 even slightly superior to the JP-200. This latter result surprised all of us, but we speculated that it was due to the very modest (at the time) modifications that I had already made to the JP-80. (We were trying to be kind to the disappointed owner of the JP-200 by this time.)

The JP-200 is not worth the extra money. In fact, the owner** put it up for sale immediately after this comparison. There were some enhancements you might pay a few hundred dollars for, not $10,000 and probably more. As a rule, component cost is not a factor in this class, but paying that much more for such a minor improvement isn't reasonable by any sane standards. The impracticality of this four chassis design is another negative factor that must also not be forgotten.

In simple terms; as superb as it was, the JP-200 was still a major disappointment.

** The owner of the JP-200 sold the preamplifier within a year, but this incident permanently changed him. He completely lost his interest in purchasing "crazy-priced" components and started looking for "value" instead. It was the English poet William Blake who wrote that: "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom".

I was able to hear the JP-30 extensively, during a period around 1990 (with a distributor's loan). I was NOT impressed with it at all. The Class C preamplifiers below, such as the MFA Magus and Audible Illusions Modulas II, were noticeably superior to the Jadis, even when they were "stock". The build quality wasn't that special either. The sound reminded me of the cheapest Conrad Johnson preamplifiers (veiled, slow and distorted), and the JP-30 was still relatively expensive. It was a major disappointment, and I felt that the component was not worthy of the Jadis "name". (I have not heard the more recent JP-30MC.)

This preamplifier should have been listed years ago, but it was another oversight on my part. I have not heard this component myself, but one of my associates has considerable experience with it, and he was greatly impressed. Since he has extensive experience with virtually every preamplifier discussed within this file, and ALL of the top preamps, that is saying quite a lot.

While he still hasn't given me a detailed description, he did emphasize that the Atma-sphere is able to convey a considerable amount of musical information; has an extended frequency response and that it also sounds "very natural". It is definitely one of the finest full preamplifiers currently available. Unfortunately, he also informed me that purchasers should be aware of two potential problem areas;

Caveat 1- The Atma-sphere is prone to noise unless you get the proper tubes, which means you must do some "tube-rolling".

Caveat 2- Early models supposedly had some reliability problems, which may have been fixed, but he's not certain. Check out websites like Tube Asylum and Audiogon for the latest information and contacts. The manufacturer has a website, which can be found in the Links File. A Google search may also be helpful.

A detailed description of these units are in the Phono Stage file. They are also here because they can be used as phono only preamplifiers.

These are both full preamplifiers with line stages. Both are superb, with the Reference model slightly superior with its advantage of a separate and larger power supply. These units, as well as the SA-9, subtract some low-level information and also lack some immediacy compared to the Class A models. Both the Control Master and the Reference have a built-in moving coil transformer; it’s very good, but not close to the Expressive.

FURTHER- Manley now has released a phono stage that can used as a full preamplifier in a simple system. It is called The Steelhead. Preliminary listening was very impressive. Readers should seriously consider this unit before committing to any preamplifier.

The VTL is an excellent preamplifier stock and superb after modifications and replacement of tubes. It is totally dual mono and has enough gain for most moving coils. This was VTL's greatest achievement in preamplifiers. The line stage is also outstanding. It has no major weakness. The sound is a little warmer than pure neutral, but it is still less colored than most Conrad Johnson designs. The bargain in this class. The Ultimate is also well built, but it is no "beauty queen". This preamplifier is no longer made. The replacements were not quite as good.

Caveat- I've been told that some of the Ultimate preamplifiers had "reliability problems", despite the fact that it is relatively "well built". They should be checked out carefully, and also auditioned (by a trusted 3rd party if necessary), before the purchase is made.

FURTHER: I have recently heard some good things about one of the replacements for The Ultimate. It is the VTL Model 5.5. It is very well made, especially for the money, with an exceptional power supply which includes a large number of MIT polypropylene capacitors. The only serious sonic weakness is the (somewhat noisy) moving-coil stage, which can be bypassed if necessary. This model should be checked out since its price is quite reasonable.

This preamplifier (the "Lumi") became a cult item even while it was still being manufactured, more than 10 years ago now. It had unique sound characteristics and was phenomenally well built, especially for the money.

The Luminescence is an "all-out" design with a huge, separate power supply that has at least four large transformers, chokes, plus (2 or 4 tube) regulation. The actual preamplifier is hardwired and uses octal tubes throughout, both rarities at the time it came out, and even today. (Earlier versions of this preamplifier, with less than 4 transformers, do not qualify for this class, but are still excellent.)

The Luminescence is full-bodied, with a very large soundstage and it doesn’t fall apart when the music gets loud. It may have as much low-level musical information as any other preamplifier in existence, with the one exception of the Jadis JP-80 series. These rare and valuable sonic strengths are the reasons this preamplifier is in such constant demand. However...

It is not particularly fast, neutral, precise or immediate sounding, but it can be noticeably improved in all those areas with modifications. These modifications; improved capacitors, better NOS octal tubes, removing RFI filters etc., are required for this preamplifier to reach its full sonic (Class B) potential.

The Luminescence's sound is so unique that it should always be auditioned before the purchase by a first time listener. My associates are split on its performance, some love it and some dislike it. I lean closer to the "love it" position.

MFA Reference- This recent model was even more "all-out" than the Luminescence. From what we have been told, and what we have read, the sound and character is very similar to its predecessor, but none of us has properly heard it in conditions which would allows us to make a serious evaluation or even an opinion.

Further- A reader, who has extensive experience with the Luminescence, recently sent me this letter, which included some (edited) observations that I felt should be shared:

"Some comments on the MFA Reference. It is of completely different design from the Lumi, it uses regular tubes (not octal base), it uses solid state regulation throughout (which rumors say was designed by John Curl). It is much quieter than the Lumi, a lot drier, cleaner, sound SOMEWHAT similar in general character to the Lumi. Definitely faster. Scott Frankland's personal favorite.

My Lumi C, which was severely modified with solid state regulation, sounds somewhat similar to Reference but is noisier and still not as clean. The Reference was used by somebody in The Absolute Sound circa 1990, or thereabout, as its reference at some point, but it didn't stay in production for long. They said it definitely sounded darker than the CAT which, in my opinion, is easy to do for any preamp. It played any MC above .15 mV with ease. Everybody I know prefers the Lumi over it, that is to say the Reference is a more "regular" sounding preamp. The last time I was in communication with Scott, he had enough parts left to build one, if anyone's interested." (8/03)

These models are all very good to excellent. There's a large variety of them out there since the manufacturer has been around now for 20 years. The more recent models are a little better, but the most recent model, the Ultimate, is both overrated and overpriced, in our experience. (There are plenty of people who disagree with that statement.)

I seriously advise comparing the Ultimate to the above Reference (Class B) models; from Manley and VTL (and don't forget the Hovland HP-100), before making any serious commitment. At the same time, at their used prices, the older models can be a much better value than virtually any new preamp for the same price. They have high gain, enough for most (but not all) MC cartridges.

The "sound" of the CAT is almost the exact opposite of the Luminescence, and should also be auditioned before the purchase. This is another "love it or hate it" component, literally. For many audiophiles, these preamps will be much better performers than the other preamplifiers in this class, with the exceptions of the ARC SP-10 and SP-11, meaning they should really be in Class B. Personally, I'm torn about this myself, but they're here just because I'm being conservative and cautious, maybe overly so.

Caveat- The volume control on many of the older CATs doesn't allow a soft volume, either on phono or line sources. They tend to get very loud very fast, and sometimes without recourse for the listener.

These preamplifiers are the best ARC made during a 10 year period; from the late 1970’s to late 1980’s. That was their "Golden Age". Personally, I (or my store) owned every single model, with the single exception of the SP-10. Sadly, ARC hasn’t been the same since then. The big change for them started with the SP-11, which sold for more than the SP-10, despite being cheaper to build. If anything, the ratio of their retail price to their manufacturing cost has appeared to grow even worse over time.

Their newer models are now overpriced, much cheaper in construction and most of them have pitiful power supplies. None of them, except the grossly overpriced "Reference" models, can match these in overall performance, and even the new "References" do not equal the best of the earlier models in overall naturalness, at least according to the observations of my associates. (Avoid the overrated "hybrid" models, the SP-9 and SP-14. Their power supplies are a disgrace for the price.)

At their used prices, the Reference models above are all bargains compared to units made today, not only in sound quality, but also in build quality. These can, and should, all be modified because their passive parts are now obsolete, especially their coupling capacitors. This is equally true for all the other preamplifiers within this class.

Among all the different models, the SP-10 is the most preferable, because it has the greatest potential, though the SP-11 will still have some sonic advantages. Of the lower-gain models, the SP-8 series is generally preferable to the SP-6 series.

ARC also made preamplifiers in the 1970’s, the SP-3 series and the solid-state SP-4. They were very well made for their day, but their sonics (the very best of their time) are not up to standards of their later models (or today). However, their phono-stages may still be excellent on their own.

These were excellent preamps made in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. Both have separate power supplies and combine a lot of detail with good low-level retrieval. It has very neutral sound with excellent speed and precision. Their gain is higher than the SP-6 and SP-8, but still less than either the SP-10 or -11.

The Magus is one of the best preamplifiers ever made for the money. It is even a better value used. It has relatively high-gain and even has a separate power supply.

It is warmer and darker than pure neutral, and it also blunts transients, but it can be improved in the areas of neutrality, transparency and speed with better coupling capacitors. The RIAA curve can also be changed, but that requires reliable information from an expert.

These are also excellent units. There must be around 5 or 6 different models, and all of them are References. They are similar in character and general performance to the best (low-gain, all tube) preamplifiers from Audio Research, though not quite as clean, extended or dynamic.

These are two of the three finest preamplifiers ever made for the money (the other is the Precision Fidelity C-7). How do they compare? The Modulus is cleaner, more neutral and has greater detail than the Magus, but it's not quite as warm and full bodied. It also doesn't have the high gain of the Magus. However, the Modulus is also a little better built, and, unlike the Magus, Audible Illusions is still in business.

The III is a little better than the finest of the II series, with its separate power supply and superior passive parts, but it is not worth the large premium you will pay if you buy it new at full retail price. It’s a lot smarter to buy a used CAT of any vintage than a new Modulus III. However, a used III can be a great deal.

If you must buy brand new, the III may still be the finest preamplifier, with phono, available today for the money.

Audible Illusions is even coming out with some new components and there is now a link to their website in the Links section.

These were "all-out" preamplifiers manufactured in the early 1980's (before I was an Audible Illusions dealer.) I later had some experience with them when my former store took them in as trade-ins. (I had a very liberal trade-in policy back then, particularly for tube equipment.) By the time I heard them for myself, they were long out of production.

The only difference I know of between the Model I and Model II, was that the II had a 12AU7 as the output tube, and the I had a 6DJ8. The price was increased with the II also, of course. (I never compared them directly, but I assume the II has some advantage.)

They had a good build-quality and the sound was excellent on both of them. They were very natural and full-bodied. The frequency extremes weren't the best, but this was a common problem back then, and even today, with most tube equipment. They were also clean and detailed. I even remember being reluctant to resell them and considered keeping them for myself, which is about the highest compliment I could give.

I haven't seen one of these for a while now, and I have no idea what they would go for used. They do need to be modified with the best capacitors, both in the signal path and power supply. Their gain is just average, meaning you will require a step-up for a typical low-output moving coil.

I sold this model when my store opened back in 1981. How I could have forgotten it until now is something I would prefer not to dwell on, but it should have been here from the beginning. This is a "classic preamplifier", with a design far ahead of not only its own time, but even up to today. In fact, our current audio market is begging for an updated version of it.

The C-7 was essentially a high quality (tube) phono-stage with two volume controls, a couple of extra (passive) inputs and no line-stage. This is "the dream design" of today's audiophiles who have phono-centric systems, like me. (My own preamplifier, the Jadis JP-80, was heavily modified to copy the basic design of the C-7.)

It's been some time since I heard one of them, but I remember their sheer natural quality and the cleanness and quietness that is consistent with no line-stage. The people who bought them, if they could live with the low-gain, loved them. (I'd love to hear a modified version, with the best caps available today. I would love even more to hear an all-out modern version of this design.)

I remember that the original C-7 had some design problems that translated into sonic problems, so look for the "A" or "Revised" versions. I don't know if the original can be converted. The C-7 should be modified with better capacitors, just like all the other preamplifiers from this era. They also require a high quality step-up device for low-output moving coils.

Recent- One reader just purchased a C-7 based on the above advice. His take:

"...soundwise - Wow! Lumi is taking a long rest. This thing sounds a bit dark (like most passives in my system, probably the amp), but it is so dynamic, immediate, transparent, and not greasy or euphonic or juicy. I'd venture to say it is rather accurate. Of all medium priced preamps that I've tried, and I've had many, including many Bruce Moore designs, this one is by far the best sounding, with great MM phono. It beats Magus by a wide margin and phono is a lot quieter (uses two solid state regulators). Thanks for a great suggestion..."

Bottom Line- If I was on "a strict budget" for a preamplifier, and with the choice of ANY model ever made, the C-7 (modified) would be my first choice.

Precision Fidelity C-8- This preamplifier was introduced at a later time, along with a few revisions. I sold a number of them. They had higher gain, but they used transistors, so a sonic price was paid. They also had a linestage. They are still "good", but they don't have the obvious natural musical qualities of the C-7.

Precision Fidelity C-9- This was their "all-out" preamplifier. It had high-gain, more than the competition, and enough for a typical moving-coil cartridge, but it used only tubes. These were very rare. I had just one in my store and, after I sold it, I wasn't able to replace it.

This was the finest high-gain preamplifier of its day. It was better than the CJ Premier II and III and the Audio Research models of its day, but it didn't receive any "hype" from the audio magazines. It was very dynamic, full-bodied, transparent and detailed. The extremes were also better than the (tube) competition. It had a somewhat "complicated" circuit, with something like 9 tubes, if I remember correctly. As a reader reminded me, the high-gain phono stage also had more noticeable tube noise than its competitors.

It had a lot of components within its single chassis, and it ran hotter than average. My model had some problems that were easily repaired, but I have no information concerning its long-term reliability. Of course, if you can find one that is still working, it must have passed that test also.

This preamplifier should be in Class C or maybe even Class B, but I don't know how many of them were actually made, and I don't want to inspire a useless wild-goose-chase. So it will stay here, for now.

I was a Quicksilver dealer in the 1980's. Most of my experiences were with their power amplifiers, but I also had their preamplifier in the store for an extended period of time. The owner/designer, Mike Sanders, who resembles Charlton Heston, visited me on several occasions (his wife came from Toronto).

The Quicksilver, there was only one model, was impressive from the first time we played it. It was clean, quiet and both natural and detailed. The gain is average, so a step-up (they also manufacture a transformer) is required with typical moving-coil pickups. In general, it was at least "good" in every sonic parameter, though not "exceptional" in any. The build quality was also excellent.

This model is preferable, overall, to both the Modulus II and the Magus. Compared to the equivalent ARC models (the SP-6/8 series), I would say it was a little more natural "stock", while they had the edge in outer definition and in the frequency extremes. The Counterpoint 5.1 outperformed it.

Quicksilver has made a line-stage and separate phono-stage since the mid 1990's, but I have no experience with these models.

HOVLAND HP-100-UNDER CONSIDERATION- This same company was originally well known for its superb and expensive capacitors. This preamplifier has not been heard by my group in a controlled setting, but I have heard and read enough about it to recommend auditioning it. It was designed to retrieve the subtle musical information that I most value. It is also well made and obviously uses top quality passive parts, including the volume control and the selector switch. They have a moving coil transformer too, but we have no word on that either yet. A final determination will be made after it is compared to the others in this class.

Further- Someone in our extended group has properly auditioned the "linestage" version of the Hovland. He felt is was superior to the Manley Control Master Linestage. He was so impressed that he purchased the Hovland. The phono stage is still a total mystery to us.

PARAGON- This company came out with a few very interesting preamplifiers during the later 1970's. I have fondly remembered experiences with them.

According to former Paragon owner, Mark Deneen, the original Model 10, designed by "consulting engineer" Bruce Moore, was "unmanufacturable" and only 50 were ever made. I never heard one, but I did hear, and even owned, the replacements, the Model 12 and 12A. They were excellent in their day, maybe the best available, with full-bodied sound, spatial information and good retrieval of decay. That was breakthrough performance at the time.

Even more intriguing was their budget model, the Model "E". It had a simpler circuit, with no tone controls (unusual at the time), and a large unregulated power supply. Paragon's own (in-house) listeners felt it was actually better than their more expensive models, but only when driving tube amplifiers.

Further- Because of their age, caution must be used when checking their condition. They should also be modified. All of the Paragon preamplifires, with the one exception of the Model 10, are in the Reference Phono Stages.

CAVEAT-Please be advised that the readers’ letters posted on this site are solely the opinion of that reader and may not necessarily represent or reflect the opinions of Arthur Salvatore or High-End Audio. These letters furthermore, are not to be taken as being endorsed by Arthur Salvatore or High-End Audio. They are posted because they may be edifying, thought provoking or entertaining.

PRECISION FIDELITY C-7 PREAMPLIFIER- This preamplifier is my choice for the "best preamplifier ever made for the money". It had a brillant minimalist design, ahead of its time, and decent execution for its day. There are several versions of it, and a reader sent me a letter with some pertinent information about them:

"In your article (on the C-7) you stated that '[you] didn't know if the C-7 could be updated to the C-7A, or C-7 Revised'.

Just to let you know, yes they can. Modifying a C-7A to a C-7 revised is a minor modification, and would take an audio engineer (or electronics tech) with a schematic and the right parts about 1 hour to do. However, modifying a C-7 to a C-7 revised is a little more time consuming, but is still relatively easy and would only take about 4 hours to do the complete job.

Just to let you know, from the basic C-7, the C-7A modifications are primarily updates to the power supply section of the preamp. The C-7 to C-7 revised is a more involved, because it has a greater involvement in upgrading the power supply; some very slight modifications to the phono stage (to increase gain); and, additional modifications to the line stage. Anyone with a complete set of schematics for all 3 versions of the preamp (which I am lucky to have) could easily do the modifications."

A reader sent me a letter asking if I knew which version, if any, of the Luminescence preamplifiers he owned. I felt it was a very early model, but advised him to contact Scott Frankland, who would be the one person who would know with certainty. He did, and this is Frankland's (edited) reply. There is an important personal note at the end. My bold:

"The Luminescence preamp began as a streamlined version of our 3-chassis Venusian preamp. Both models were specifically designed around octal-base triodes. Venusians were built from the late 70's til the mid-80's. Lumi's were built from 1983 to 1990 (see attached revision key*).

What you have is a transition model prototype, probably built in the mid-80's, and intended to be a bridge out of the octal-tube quandry. At a certain point we began to have difficulty finding adequate stocks of 5691 octal triodes (these were needed to keep the noise under control in the Lumi phono stage). We then tried for some years to effect a "Lumi" using 9-pin tubes. Yours was one of the many attempts. At a certain point we realized that we could never duplicate the sound of the Lumi using 9-pin tubes, so we stopped trying. We set out instead to produce a 9-pin preamp that would simply stand on its own merits. The result was the MC Reference, which was produced in small numbers during the early 90's.

As always, I service and upgrade all MFA equipment. I just don't advertise the fact. Word of mouth is usually sufficient to find me. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance..."

Scott Frankland
11271 Enchanto Vista
San Jose, CA 95127
408-926-6731 TEL
408-926-9003 FAX
audioeng@pacbell.net

Personal Note- I have a copy of the Luminescense "revision key" (a PDF file)*, which can be sent to readers upon request.