New Tube Tape Preamp out soon-
- Thread starter U47
- Start date
Doc,
Care to elaberate a little on the sound you are talking about? Try to describe this vintage Ampex vibe if you can, I am curious and want your opinion.
Jay
Care to elaberate a little on the sound you are talking about? Try to describe this vintage Ampex vibe if you can, I am curious and want your opinion.
Jay
i was in Kara's room for 30-45 minutes and really enjoyed the tape pre. Rich and Kara are planning on bringing it up in a couple of weeks to listen and compare to the King/Cello in my system.
it's hard to really separate what the tape pre is doing exactly in the context of a system but i thought it was quite neutral with a low noise floor. it might be a 'ying' to the Cello's 'yang' in my system. and at $2250 you cannot go too far wrong. hopefully it will be capable of working with my darTZeel 'zeel' 50 ohm BNC cables in some fashion.
it's hard to really separate what the tape pre is doing exactly in the context of a system but i thought it was quite neutral with a low noise floor. it might be a 'ying' to the Cello's 'yang' in my system. and at $2250 you cannot go too far wrong. hopefully it will be capable of working with my darTZeel 'zeel' 50 ohm BNC cables in some fashion.
Yeah Doc, was that a left-handed compliment? I have a pair of Ampex 350s and I haven't ascribed a sonic thumbprint to them yet. I think they sound great, and their sound changes with whatever preamp they are plugged into. The sound didn't change much between using a Counterpoint SA-5.1 preamp and a Cary SLP-98L as those preamps sound more alike than different. I am currently using an ARC LS-17 preamp which I believe to be the more neutral among the other 2 preamps and the 350s now sound more neutral as well.
Ampex 'sound'
I agree with Doc completely on the Ampex 'sound'. It is addictive and distinctive. Ampex sound has a certain organic 'phatness' that is easily recognizable. I just experienced that sound again on a friend's system up in Seattle. Here is a short video I shot last Friday. BTW, it is one of the best systems I've heard at ANY price on orchestral material. 3 channel stacked KLH 9s(formerly owned by Ewing Nunn) driven by 3 Marantz 9 amps, Marantz 7 preamp and Ampex 351(Dittenfass restored) and a Cambridge SACD player. The RCA and Mercury SACDs do benefit greatly with a center channel.
Steve asked me about how I would characterize the Ampex 'sound'. Best described as the sound of the best US recordings from the 50s and early 60s. As magical and right as the sound of the legendary Neumann U47 microphone, which was often used with the Ampex back in the day.
http://www.youtube.com/user/richardu47#p/a/u/1/zSs2Dpzu0Sw
Rich Brown
I agree with Doc completely on the Ampex 'sound'. It is addictive and distinctive. Ampex sound has a certain organic 'phatness' that is easily recognizable. I just experienced that sound again on a friend's system up in Seattle. Here is a short video I shot last Friday. BTW, it is one of the best systems I've heard at ANY price on orchestral material. 3 channel stacked KLH 9s(formerly owned by Ewing Nunn) driven by 3 Marantz 9 amps, Marantz 7 preamp and Ampex 351(Dittenfass restored) and a Cambridge SACD player. The RCA and Mercury SACDs do benefit greatly with a center channel.
Steve asked me about how I would characterize the Ampex 'sound'. Best described as the sound of the best US recordings from the 50s and early 60s. As magical and right as the sound of the legendary Neumann U47 microphone, which was often used with the Ampex back in the day.
http://www.youtube.com/user/richardu47#p/a/u/1/zSs2Dpzu0Sw
Rich Brown
Last edited:
Not at all, and I don't really understand why you would say that. I think the vintage Ampex tube electronic sound is distinctive, and I happen to appreciate it. I've taken best sound of show with a 350 and Schafer repro electronics that are similar to stock Ampex electronics. I think Kara said she put a Nortronics head on her 350, so one thing that might be a bit different than the vintage ampex electronics with vintage Ampex playback head sound is the top end response. But I don't know that for sure based on a few minutes listening at a show.
Here's a bad pic of "The Herniator" with it's builder, Dave Dintenfass. This deck was part of the system we built that took best sound of show from several reviewers at VSAC 2003:
Rich-Thanks for sharing that very cool video. Your friend's system is killer. His Ampex 351 setup looks like it is in great shape. That system is the suitcase system that was designed to be used for on-site recording. My brother has the same setup but his is the 350 version. Although the 351 preamps and the 350 preamps look very similiar, they are very different. I do think that the 350s were Ampex's all out assualt on the state of the art. When Ampex came out with the 351 series, there were many changes. Gone were the outboard dual mono power supplies. Also gone was the point-to-point wiring. The 351s have the power transformer mounted inside the chassis and the circuit is built on a circuit board. The tubes used are also different. I would have to assume that the 351s were cheaper to manufacture then the 350s. The 350s also have their tubes mounted to a plate that is shock mounted so it floats to minimize vibration induction to the tubes.
I totally agree that the sound is addiictive. It just sounds right. They will also sound different depending upon what preamp you are playing them through. They certainly sound more neutral through my ARC LS-17 then they did through my Counterpoint SA-5.1 (currently out for modification by Mike Elliott) or the Cary SLP-98L. I am very happy that I own a pair.
Mark
I totally agree that the sound is addiictive. It just sounds right. They will also sound different depending upon what preamp you are playing them through. They certainly sound more neutral through my ARC LS-17 then they did through my Counterpoint SA-5.1 (currently out for modification by Mike Elliott) or the Cary SLP-98L. I am very happy that I own a pair.
Mark
Doc-Sorry if I misunderstood what you meant to say. I was reading into it that it was a "vintage" sound and therefore not as good as what is being made today. So when you said it really had a nice vintage Ampex vibe to it, I thought you were paying it a left handed compliment. That is why I said it.
Kara has used both 350 and 351 electronics and she prefers the 351. My friend in Japan has used both and he also prefers the 351. The 350 was made earlier and both are part of the AG(Audio General) series. The MR(Master Recorder) series included the legendary MR-70 and the ATR-102. I've owned them both and would take a 351 any day. The 351 electronics sure are clean and cool looking though. There was definitely a cost cutting move going from the 350 to 351. The transport was identical on the 350 and 351. Getting a selected low noise 12SJ7(or whatever that first tube is) for a 350 was possible in the 50s. Good luck sourcing one now.
REB
REB
You have me chuckling because I am my father's son and he used to say "When I see s**t, I say "s**t!" In other words, you probably won't have any trouble discerning if I don't like something. Just ask my friends about that and watch them roll their eyes.
I have a 1956 Telefunken Salzburg console that I love to listen to the local jazz station on. It's a little warm and very sweet and to me it's just perfect for listening to John Kessler's blues show on KPLU. I also really liked the sound we were getting in the Magico room at RMAF with my Nagra, which has been described as "super accurate and neutral" or something to that effect by a few reviewers. I like showing with TAD speakers too, and they definitely sound different than Magicos or that old Telefunken. This forum is called "What's Best", but I for one am thankful that there really is no universal "best" and that we are allowed to have choices that fit our different moods.
That's the one thing about the Ampex tube sound,once you have heard it, you are hooked. Some describe it as phat,but I think that the best quality is the enormously huge and layered soundstage it reproduces. When Dave Dintenfass does his magic on either a 350 or 351 you can be sure that the sound will be better than original. I have never heard the 351's,but the 350's are truly impressive. I should have my 350's back from my local tech after replacing the signal caps with film and I expect the sound will be a big step up. The 350 can benifit by selecting all glass tubes and filtering out RFI. With the point to point wiring,the low noise floor produces a "scary" black background, that conveys a ease and naturalness to the music that can only be described as total magic. Even though the above You tube video is limited in sound quallity, I can pick up these qualities.
Soon I will have my Ampex MR70 restored and I can compare that system to my Ampex 350's and my RTZ Ampex 440. That shootout should be exciting as those lucky enough to have the MR70 feel that it is the best tape system ever made.
Soon I will have my Ampex MR70 restored and I can compare that system to my Ampex 350's and my RTZ Ampex 440. That shootout should be exciting as those lucky enough to have the MR70 feel that it is the best tape system ever made.
If the Ampex sound is all that you say it is, then Kara's new pre should be as good. I am led to beleive that she pretty much copied the ampex design.
Jay
Jay
Doc,
I didn't know that. I thought you were using Aria electronics. The MR70 electronics are nuvistor based designs and feature 4 EQ capability,the only electronics to do so. There are only maybe 2 or 3 people that have a keen understanding of the Ampex MR70 machine,to be competant to restore and upgrade the design. Ampex built about 80 MR70's and about 40 or less are still operational. Most have been parted out as the electronics have been used in recording studios. The 1/4" 2 track is very rare,maybe 5 in existance. The 1 inch 8 track is the rarest as only one is known to exist. The Stereophile Cd with flute and piano was recorded on a MR70. Also Richardson recording has produced a few CD's of the Navy marching band at Annapolis with a Ampex MR70.
Roger,
Exactly what would be nice? That she copied the design or that it sounds like the Ampex?
Jay
FYI, the phono section in the McIntosh MX-110 is identical to the Ampex 351 playback circuit, with the exception of the difference in eq. components. If you're going to copy(steal), you might as well copy from the best 
Why re-invent the wheel?
REB
Why re-invent the wheel?
REB
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |