advertisement


Quad preamps - is there any hope?

I preferred the 33 in CANCEL to an early new 34, the 33 sounded more transparent, see through. An MF preamp sounded in between the two, and Exposure 6 and 7 was in a different league.

The ESL57s sat on the floor sounded muddy, but on spiked stands mounted vertically - all was forgiven.

I sold that system in 1989 after 14 years, moved to a new flat earth Exposure/Monitor Audio system which was excellent, very exciting but after 20 years sounded flat needing servicing etc.. So I moved to an ATC integrated/Harbeth system which is just right - echoes of ESLs tone and nice dynamics.
 
TonyScarlett said:
FWIW I enjoyed the Nait 5si I had for a while into the Stirlings but it wasn't a presentation I could live with long-term.
TS
Click to expand...

The Quad combination with the Stirling V3s has been very successful, so
I thought I’d try the Falcon Q7s with the 34/306.
Very good indeed.

As the Nait 2 hasn’t been used for a few weeks, I linked it up to the Q7s for a listen.

Interestingly I think I slightly preferred the Nait to the 34/306 with the Q7s,
though there wasn’t much in it.
 
Last edited:
prowla said:
Back to the question...

No - it's like listening to music with cotton wool stuffed in your ears.
Click to expand...
There was a rebuilt valve Quad pre at Kegworth a few years back, into rebuilt/restored JBL L40s that sounded absolutely superb.
 
Seanm said:
Have to admit I find the Vena integrated quite a significant improvement over my recently serviced 34/306, especially the phono.
Click to expand...
Fan of old Quad amps, prefer 33 303 overall.
I had the Vena Mk1.With my Stirling V2s I found it wasnt as smooth sounding as 303 405 and 33. Using a Slee Communicator phono at the time. It sounded like a different topology of amp. Detailed, forward, more gain. More all things to all men. Wanted to like it as it looked great and had so many features in a small box.

But in the end it was another box on to the boxswapping scrapheap. Has put me off trying a Mk2.
 
I recently added a Quad Elite pre to my QSP power amp (pretty much the same as a 99/909), replacing a Croft 25 valve pre. There was a period of adjustment required as it's quite a different presentation, but it has definitely made a considerable improvement to my listening enjoyment. With the Croft in place I was thinking that I might have to change my speakers as my ears are becoming increasingly sensitive to certain sounds or frequencies (probably connected to my tinnitus) and I found that I was more likely to turn music down than up. With the Elite pre this is mostly a thing of the past as it seems smoother and more relaxed though I don't feel like I've lost any detail and I'm getting a wider or clearer stereo effect. Plus having the bass lift/cut and tilt controls available via the remote is really handy!

Had a session with these amps and my Quad 77-10L speakers (normally my office desktop speakers) over the weekend - very enjoyable but back to the Tannoys now which is even better!
 
Interesting I used a Croft 25 standard pre with 303 and 405. Liked it a lot. The thing that ruined it for me in the end was it wasn't a good match visually. And for me the travel on the volume switch to get loudness ie adjusting gain. I think you have to change a resistor or get Glenn to do it but it all seemed a bit of a phaff.

I found like yourself having a user adjustable pre for your own room/setup trumps any 'better' sounding alternative.
 
regafan said:
Interesting I used a Croft 25 standard pre with 303 and 405. Liked it a lot. The thing that ruined it for me in the end was it wasn't a good match visually. And for me the travel on the volume switch to get loudness ie adjusting gain. I think you have to change a resistor or get Glenn to do it but it all seemed a bit of a phaff.

I found like yourself having a user adjustable pre for your own room/setup trumps any 'better' sounding alternative.
Click to expand...

Yeah the convenience and room tailoring factor is much higher with the Quad pre in place, for sure. Plus I probably should have said that I did think the Quad / Croft combo sounded very good but I wouldn't say it was better, just different. It could be that if I had different speakers then I might have been happier to keep the Croft, but right now I wouldn't swap back.
 
Croft/Quad seems like a popular combination. I really liked the 25 pre with a 306 into Tannoys, preferring that to a 99/306 pairing (which in turn I preferred to 34/306). In the end though I missed having a remote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top