AccuTidal Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Nice! Congrats TuyêÌn! Please count me in!
Pops110 Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Sweeeeet. I'm definately in for this one. When's it on? Have been messing round with the Bakoon and the Kenwood L1000 pre, I'm sure it sounds better with the pre in front. Would love to hear it with a descent pre in front to see if I'm imagining things or not. Cheers Dave.
TP1 Posted October 18, 2013 Author Posted October 18, 2013 Congrats Tuyen! Looks great and pity you can't get to play with it properly for a few days!
TP1 Posted October 18, 2013 Author Posted October 18, 2013 Sweeeeet. I'm definately in for this one. When's it on? Have been messing round with the Bakoon and the Kenwood L1000 pre, I'm sure it sounds better with the pre in front. Would love to hear it with a descent pre in front to see if I'm imagining things or not. Cheers Dave. I have heard Bakoon amps being driven by the Coincident preamp- very nice indeed!
Pops110 Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 I thought so Tasso. The 15 watts seem to have a bit more authority and depth? If that's what you would call it. Would running it at full gain with the pre attenuating make it sound better? I thought less is more in hifi? Cheers Dave.
TP1 Posted October 18, 2013 Author Posted October 18, 2013 I would think its the best way to go . The amps I tried it with were 100w and they certainly came alive when used this way.
TP1 Posted October 19, 2013 Author Posted October 19, 2013 The WE look pretty similar to your Shuguang 101D
tuyen Posted October 27, 2013 Posted October 27, 2013 (edited) That is true Tasso. As you heard from Steve, the genuine WE101D are a no go'er due to the incompatible pin size/layout. The Psvanes you lent me (though only done less than 20 hours as you had mentioned) does change the tonal balance a bit. Little hot in the mid-highs at the moment. Much prefer the standard Shuguangs. While the TJ/Full Music mesh plates are a bit noisey/hashy in comparison. I can see why Israel Blume has chosen to supply the Shuguangs with his units. Edited October 27, 2013 by tuyen
lbk Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 Hi Tasso, How I am new kid in the block. Does the CSLS sound better everyday? I am actually looking for pre-amp and have settle down with either Cabernet Dual or CSLS. Can help to share why you like CSLS more than Cabernet Dual or what dual is lacking as compare CSLS? Is your Dual the 25th anniversary version? Reasons for the new preamp.... I am planing to revamp my system, going for bi-amp. My current SS will drive the bass and get a 300B amp for treble. Need 2 new toys, a new pre-amp and 300B amp (likely Frankenstein 300B) that lead to 2 options 1) Coincident CSLS + Frankenstein 300B. CSLS doesn't have individual vol control for treble and bass, chances are bass and treble have diff gain, no harmony/balance. 2) Cabernet Dual + Frankenstein 300B. Your inputs and advise will be greatly appreciated. Thanks Cheers LB 1
TP1 Posted November 5, 2013 Author Posted November 5, 2013 (edited) Hi LB, The Supratek Cabernet Dual is a fine preamp but like so many things in the electronics world advancements are made in design and that is the case with the CSLS. Apart from my own situation, another SNA member has recently replaced his Cabernet Dual with the CSLS after having my Coincident preamp in his system within the past 2 weeks. It was also compared to another more expensive preamp ( provided by a dealer) as an alternative to the Supratek and the CSLS came out ahead again. Because of the unique design features of the CSLS, some of the differences below apply to a number of preamps not just the Supratek but to be specific: 1. The Coincident has a vastly bigger sound stage and more palpable 3D imaging. It achieves this in a natural and convincing manner and is immediately noticeable. 2. The sound was more transparent and revealing with a more a natural timbre to voices and instruments, and without appearing to add any particular flavour. It also revealed finer details more convincingly. This transparency is difficult to put into words but it strikes you immediately when you hear it and combined with the imaging and soundstage there is no mistaking that you are a couple of steps closer to the real thing. 3. Dynamics and speed were superior with the CSLS. The best I have come across for a tube preamp. 4. Bass from the CSLS was significantly better than the Cabernet on the 101D outputs. The Coincident kept on producing lower and lower notes when the Supratek had rolled them off. The result being that the Coincident had a significantly extended bass extension and definition compared to the Supratek 101D output. The Supratek has the 6H30 outputs which can be used while bi-amping to produce extra bass but I still preferred the overall balance and accuracy of the CSLS when I was bi-amping my speakers . ( Identical power amps used on bass and treble) Bass control with CSLS is noticeably better. With the Cabernet it produced a bit of a bloom on the 6H30 output which i controlled with different rectifier valve choices. 5. The Coincident is remarkably quiet with a blacker background . It also has genuine balanced inputs that sound superior to the balanced connections converted to single ended input. Now in terms of your dilemma for bi-amping, your SS bass amps are likely to be more powerful and with higher gain than the Frankenstein 300B and you can therefore simply deploy a passive attenuator between the CSLS and the bass amps. There are a number of options from passive preamp types to something like an autoformer volume control such as the one below which should have minimal sonic impact . Remember, the Supratek 6H30 output passes through 2 standard volume pots - the master volume control and the 6H30 output pot. http://www.enjoythemusic.com/diy/0611/slagle_autoformer_volume_control_modules.htm Edited November 5, 2013 by Tasso
tuyen Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 Me being another recent owner of the CSLS, I have to say it is the finest preamp that I have had on my system so far that can sonically match the balance/resolution/clarity of my slagle autoformer based volume controller. Where I find the CSLS goes further in terms of SQ over the passive AVC, is that it seems to add a level of 'ease' to the music. In turn I find this gives a improved sense of effortless dynamics. What I like also like about the CSLS is how open and the soundstage appears. A other valve preamps I have tried, may have given a 'sweeter' or 'thicker' tonal character, but I have found that does not sound 'true' to my ears after a while. I have also tried Tasso's previous Supratek Cabernet Dual on my system and while it did sound quite dynamic, I found it lacked bass depth and the soundstage was not as open or '3D' as I was expecting. Maybe it's ultra high gain was not suitable for my system. I only had to turn the Alps Blue volume pot 3-4mm up and the volume was too loud already... maybe more suitable for a standard sensitivity speaker system? Anyways, some photos of the custom slagle autoformer volume controller. This is my preference and recommendation if one is wanting best method of line signal attenuation.
pulinap Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 "As you heard from Steve, the genuine WE101D are a no go'er due to the incompatible pin size/layout. " I think there is a socket from Yamamoto that can accommodate both original 101D pins (4 similar) and new 101D ( two big, two small -similar to 300b) 1
statman Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 Hi LB, The Supratek Cabernet Dual is a fine preamp but like so many things in the electronics world advancements are made in design and that is the case with the CSLS. Apart from my own situation, another SNA member has recently replaced his Cabernet Dual with the CSLS after having my Coincident preamp in his system within the past 2 weeks. It was also compared to another more expensive preamp ( provided by a dealer) as an alternative to the Supratek and the CSLS came out ahead again. Because of the unique design features of the CSLS, some of the differences below apply to a number of preamps not just the Supratek but to be specific: 1. The Coincident has a vastly bigger sound stage and more palpable 3D imaging. It achieves this in a natural and convincing manner and is immediately noticeable. 2. The sound was more transparent and revealing with a more a natural timbre to voices and instruments, and without appearing to add any particular flavour. It also revealed finer details more convincingly. This transparency is difficult to put into words but it strikes you immediately when you hear it and combined with the imaging and soundstage there is no mistaking that you are a couple of steps closer to the real thing. 3. Dynamics and speed were superior with the CSLS. The best I have come across for a tube preamp. 4. Bass from the CSLS was significantly better than the Cabernet on the 101D outputs. The Coincident kept on producing lower and lower notes when the Supratek had rolled them off. The result being that the Coincident had a significantly extended bass extension and definition compared to the Supratek 101D output. The Supratek has the 6H30 outputs which can be used while bi-amping to produce extra bass but I still preferred the overall balance and accuracy of the CSLS when I was bi-amping my speakers . ( Identical power amps used on bass and treble) Bass control with CSLS is noticeably better. With the Cabernet it produced a bit of a bloom on the 6H30 output which i controlled with different rectifier valve choices. 5. The Coincident is remarkably quiet with a blacker background . It also has genuine balanced inputs that sound superior to the balanced connections converted to single ended input. Now in terms of your dilemma for bi-amping, your SS bass amps are likely to be more powerful and with higher gain than the Frankenstein 300B and you can therefore simply deploy a passive attenuator between the CSLS and the bass amps. There are a number of options from passive preamp types to something like an autoformer volume control such as the one below which should have minimal sonic impact . Remember, the Supratek 6H30 output passes through 2 standard volume pots - the master volume control and the 6H30 output pot. http://www.enjoythemusic.com/diy/0611/slagle_autoformer_volume_control_modules.htm Tasso As you know I'm the designer and (occasional) manufacturer of the Dual Cabernet. I appreciate your fair and honest comparism of the Coincident and Cabernet, and I have no argument with it. However I believe your Cabernet was built in 2007 and the design has moved on significantly from then. Although I'm no fan of transformer volume controls,( just as I was using the 101D many years ago, I spent a lot of time using TVC's) I've changed the circuit of the Cabernet to go somewhere between the sound of TVC and a more conventional , easier to use remote control- there's no denying TVC's have that openness you describe, although the "phasiness" and bass resonances of them drives me crazy. And as you say, at this level, it comes down to personal taste and system synergy. I'll have to send a modern Cabernet up to Steve, I'd be interested to see how it compares to the Coincident, which I think is a very good design, and excellent value. 2
AudioGeek Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Hey guys, what sort of power amps are you using with the coincident? The output impedance seems high 500ohms (my active speakers have an input impedance of 10000ohms). Cheers
tuyen Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 HI AG, I am using a Pioneer D-23 electronic crossover which has an input impedance of 100kohms. Power amp wise, I'm using various amps I have lying around (nothing exotic or that special). A Yamaha P2201 to power the 15" woofers, LM3875 chip amp to power mid drivers and Hiraga Class A amp to power the tweeters.
TP1 Posted November 6, 2013 Author Posted November 6, 2013 Tasso As you know I'm the designer and (occasional) manufacturer of the Dual Cabernet. I appreciate your fair and honest comparism of the Coincident and Cabernet, and I have no argument with it. However I believe your Cabernet was built in 2007 and the design has moved on significantly from then. Although I'm no fan of transformer volume controls,( just as I was using the 101D many years ago, I spent a lot of time using TVC's) I've changed the circuit of the Cabernet to go somewhere between the sound of TVC and a more conventional , easier to use remote control- there's no denying TVC's have that openness you describe, although the "phasiness" and bass resonances of them drives me crazy. And as you say, at this level, it comes down to personal taste and system synergy. I'll have to send a modern Cabernet up to Steve, I'd be interested to see how it compares to the Coincident, which I think is a very good design, and excellent value. Hi Mick It is inevitable that newer designs come along and challenge those before them. Not all are better as we know and the Supratek is still a very fine preamp indeed. However, there is far more to the Coincident preamp than TVC. In fact there is a new model without TVC but with remote control for volume as well as source switching and it is supposed to retain much of the CSLS characteristics. I have detected no phasiness or bass resonances that you mention about TVC and it seems clear that Coincident have got it right with their design and implementation. Of course I look forward to hearing your latest creation as I am sure others would too. 3
TP1 Posted November 6, 2013 Author Posted November 6, 2013 (edited) Hey guys, what sort of power amps are you using with the coincident? The output impedance seems high 500ohms (my active speakers have an input impedance of 10000ohms). Cheers 500 Ohms is not too bad for a valve preamp. I use both SS and valve power amps without any impedance matching concerns - valve has 50K input impedance and SS is 100K. Others may chime in about this but I always understood that an input impedance of the power amp should be at least 10 times the output impedance of the preamp. I have also seen some people recommend 20 times, so your active speakers are within that range. Edited November 6, 2013 by Tasso
henry218 Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 hi tasso and tuyen, i know this is a long shot, but how does the mingda MC300 pre compared to the Coincident? ive been lookong for tube pre, but the coincident just out of my budget for now. cheers henry
AccuTidal Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Of course I look forward to hearing your latest creation as I am sure others would too. I'd love to hear the revised/latest creation from Mick. hi tasso and tuyen, i know this is a long shot, but how does the mingda MC300 pre compared to the Coincident? ive been lookong for tube pre, but the coincident just out of my budget for now. cheers henry I think this question is subjective to personal taste and system synergy. Personally, I enjoyed the sweetness and warm sound of the Mingda Pre and even better yet when it was modded with Duelunds and Black Treasure tube. The more time I spend with it, our chemistry is getting stronger! But this is just coming from a rookie point of view which has no warrant! :lol: On the other hand, I found the CSLS also enjoyable. Very neutral tone, much less coloration in contrast to the Mingda, but its attractions are the Massive 3D sound-stage, very fine dynamic/instrument separations, and giving audience the sense of concert hall presence feeling, even more so with Tuyen's set of diy Horns. Bloody amazing, I'd say.
henry218 Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 hi 24bits, thanks for the reply, the mingda must be really good value. but $200 cap for $1500pre? henry
TP1 Posted November 6, 2013 Author Posted November 6, 2013 hi 24bits, thanks for the reply, the mingda must be really good value. but $200 cap for $1500pre? henry Hi Henry, You are right - I wouldn't recommend doing everything I did. This was a bit of a journey into the world of mods by me and I can say that not all mods improve performance and not all components are worth their asking price! The MC300 pre is very good in stock form and it responds very well to tube upgrades and this should be more than enough for most people. If you really want to go down the mod path, then I would only be doing the valve coupling capacitors, and the rectifier valve cap. In terms of valves the Shuguang 300B-z Black treasures are truly special , and the TJ full Music 274B/n rectifier valve also makes a sonic improvement. 2
AccuTidal Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Hi henry, Mingda MC300 Pre is not mine and I was never queried the modifications cost. I loan the Mingda while my CJ CT6 is on transit to/back from Caxton Audio, Brisbane. CT6 should be here in a week time. Also in waiting is my Bob Carver VTA 180M with slightly minor mod done. I am looking for someone in W.A, who has KT120 tubes for me to try them out prior financial commitment. I read on the net that KT120s give even better 3D soundstage and better bass to SS. So W.A SNAers, please let me know if you do carry a pairs of sextet KT120? 1
henry218 Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 thanks Tasso and 24Bits. so CJ CT6 is better?
tuyen Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Hi Henry, I concur with what 24bits has written re the MingDa MC300-PRE and the CSLS. The MingDa is very sweet, rich, dynamic and open sounding preamp. My thinking is that it must be quite well designed and built as it is relatively low noise (only a little buzzing or hum on idle) for a DHT (though the CSLS is in a diff class with regards to noise) and because it emits no scary startup/shutdown pops. The CSLS to me sounds more 'pure' and neutral (reference being the use of a passive Autoformer based volume controller using David Slagle (aka Intact Audio) modules).
Recommended Posts