advertisement


Quad preamps - is there any hope?

From Prowla:
No - it's like listening to music with cotton wool stuffed in your ears.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The Quad amps have the unique capability of making any connected loudspeaker sound as if it's face down on the carpet. They don't do anything wrong, it's just that they don't do anything right either (such as stirring the blood for instance).

I just noted the above link and whilst idly drifting through the products, I remembered a previous life 'hot rodding' Quads. The pre-amps were blighted by one particular design quirk - switching of signals is carried out by cmos integrated circuits. These 4066 quad bilateral switches were designed for use in the Plessey 'System X' Telephone Exchanges. They were never intended to be used in equipment with a wide dynamic range and consequently, literally strangle everything trying to pass through them. We had to go to inordinate lengths to replace the 4066 cmos switches by some sealed reed relays which is in my opinion, well beyond the scope of DIY.

Bottom line: Don't waste your time and effort.
 
Les: just bought a 99 preamp, 4066s still in there. Strangely enough the 99 is dynamic and transparent...maybe the 4066 has improved since 1979?
cheers
tom
 
Originally posted by prowla
Back to the question...

No - it's like listening to music with cotton wool stuffed in your ears.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Prowla (and LesW), but this is simply not true - at least not true for all of humanity. I don't dispute that you hear it that way, but I don't. I can't claim to have tested a vast array of amplifiers, but among the ones I have tested, the Quads sound much the same as others. Atv the moment, I am running an EAR 834L and a Quad 44 and I can switch between them. I'm told that the EAR is a good amp. When the levels are matched, I have to look at the switches to see which one is playing.

I might be a minority of one, but to me the old Quads are great - and great value these days. This is not to dispute that there is much better to be had, but Quad can give you great music at a good price, which is what it's all about.

(My hearing? Fine. Had it tested last week. No problems).
 
Originally posted by prowla
Not just tone deaf, then?:D
Click to expand...

Apparently not. I guess different people like different sounds. I'm a nearly 100% classical listener and I like very much the noises my Quads and LS3/5As make. Were I a wealthier person, I'd listen to some other stuff, but I'm not really that interested. (I'd never make a REAL audiophile).
 
prowla said:
Back to the question...

No - it's like listening to music with cotton wool stuffed in your ears.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But they can be modified to yield a vast improvement. [See my thread on modifying the Quad44 if you are interested].
 
I currently have a 66 pre at home along with the 306 power amp & 66CD which an old family friend has asked me to sell

I've surprisingly had to revise my assumption of what the sound would be like hooked up to a pair of Rogers Studio 1a speakers. OK it's not as dynamic, believable or as resolved as the Dynavectors / Shahinians but I could happily live with it if required

The real downside I can see is that everything is controlled off the remote, but I know the orginal owner & it has been totally reliable. Quad have confirmed today they can still service these & would be able to sort out the CD display which no longer functions. It's tempting for a second system...........

52288460175_d39b3ecf77_c.jpg
 
In spite of some very negative comments, I like the Quad 34.
Especially when linked up to my 306.

But who am I to express an opinion?
I like my Audiolab 8000A.
Some here say that they wouldn’t even use it as a doorstop.

We all like different things.
Criticise all you like.
Some here spend hundreds of pounds on lengths of wire.
As I said, we all like different things...
 
I've used a couple of 34s and found them fine. If you need in room correction in the form of tone controls and balance they can't be beat for the money. Do bear in mind that they will all be due a service by now and the design improved and changed significantly during the production run, so they are not all equal.

Dropping the sensitivity on the tuner input and recalibrating the output voltage are also worth considering.

Pick up a mint orange logo one or s/no 30000+ and get amplabs to breathe on it and you'll have a great, very useable active pre for £400 or so.
 
Since this thread has popped up again, I should add that I've been using a Quad 33 preamp (with full DADA mods) for a couple of years now and have no complaints. It does everything I need.
 
kasperhauser said:
Since this thread has popped up again, I should add that I've been using a Quad 33 preamp (with full DADA mods) for a couple of years now and have no complaints. It does everything I need.
Click to expand...

+1 for the DADA mods - improves the stock performance of a 33 noticeably.
Only additional mod I would recommend is moving the PSU to a separate box ....
 
I used a Dada 33/303 for a while and was pleasantly surprised by what I heard.
Not as woolly as I imagined and very easy on the ear.
With a Sony CDP 303ES it made a nice little system.
 
lilolee said:
And if the Quad 34 is good enough for Alan Shaw, who designs Harbeth speakers, then it should be good enough for anyone.
Click to expand...

Hah !
AS is about selling speakers and saying no real difference between amps.
This seem to have brainwashed a few.
 
I reckon if we were not all brainwashed or influenced with stereo equipment, we would have gear which was so left field...............none of us would have heard it!
 
HI all,

I occasionally use a QUAD 34 and I don’t understand how people can say it sounds dull, the response is flat to 30 Khz. It has flexible tone controls and filtering for those of you that listen to allot of historic recordings these can be quite handy. Also; the 34's Phono stage is actually quite good.

FR-HF-10-110kHz.gif


My unit has been rebuilt with new electrolytic caps (just normal low ESR, 105°C, off the shelf manufacture, nothing exotic) and it works a treat.

I still think it was one of QUADS better designs and I actually think its better than the more expensive 44 if you don’t need the extra tape loop and plug in cards. With the 34 everything (except the Phono “front-end head amp” adaptor) is contained on one single PCB.

LPSpinner.
 
LPSpinner said:
HI all,

I occasionally use a QUAD 34 and I don’t understand how people can say it sounds dull, the response is flat to 30 Khz. It has flexible tone controls and filtering for those of you that listen to allot of historic recordings these can be quite handy. Also; the 34's Phono stage is actually quite good.

FR-HF-10-110kHz.gif


My unit has been rebuilt with new electrolytic caps (just normal low ESR, 105°C, off the shelf manufacture, nothing exotic) and it works a treat.

I still think it was one of QUADS better designs and I actually think its better than the more expensive 44 if you don’t need the extra tape loop and plug in cards. With the 34 everything (except the Phono “front-end head amp” adaptor) is contained on one single PCB.

LPSpinner.
Click to expand...

The Quad 34 was certainly a lovely bit of design, and ergonomically possibly the best, but I was truly surprised at how good the matching Quad 306 power amp sounded when liberated from the 34 pre-amp (both serviced by Quad at the same time). The Quad 34 is, in my experience, indeed very dull sounding, with a sonic 'greyness' to match its looks; however that's my own experience and I'm very happy for any Quad 34 users who enjoy theirs.

I'm tempted to get another 306 power amp.
 
LPSpinner said:
HI all,

I occasionally use a QUAD 34 and I don’t understand how people can say it sounds dull, the response is flat to 30 Khz. It has flexible tone controls and filtering for those of you that listen to allot of historic recordings these can be quite handy. Also; the 34's Phono stage is actually quite good.

FR-HF-10-110kHz.gif


My unit has been rebuilt with new electrolytic caps (just normal low ESR, 105°C, off the shelf manufacture, nothing exotic) and it works a treat.

I still think it was one of QUADS better designs and I actually think its better than the more expensive 44 if you don’t need the extra tape loop and plug in cards. With the 34 everything (except the Phono “front-end head amp” adaptor) is contained on one single PCB.

LPSpinner.
Click to expand...

I have bought a Quad 34/306 recently, as many years ago I owned a 33/303 amplifier.
My thinking was, as they rarely drop in value, I could sell it on.
I’ve been using a Naim Nait 2 for approx. a year and was impressed by it.

Setting up the 34/306, yes it did sound initially ‘dull’ ( strange term ) but after extended listening the
Quads have their own particular ‘sound’, just like any amplifier.

With some music the Nait can sound a little strident, on other music it sounds nearly perfect.
The Quads are more ‘even handed’ with all types of music.

See my further thoughts on the PFM Classic section, under ‘Amplifier Comparison - Naim and Quad.’

With amplifiers, as with other audio components, we all choose different things.
‘Each to this own.’
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top