I think you are already at the forefront of what you should expect from a great tube amp at that power rating - changing to EL34s will give you another sonic signature though. |
Vintage, if you are still out there, what did you end up doing? |
Troyca, what other amp are you comparing it to that you feel it is better than? NAD 3020, or CAT JL2 - know what I mean? What is you comparative context? |
Very interesting. I've been using the Music Reference Pot-in-the-Box today (just got it) with the CAT JL2 and it blew me away how good this thing sounded in absolute terms, and ridiculous for $135. I've got the RM9 MKII coming next week and am eager to try it with the passive; I did not get a chance to try it with the RM10 MKII which I just sold this week, a very sweet 35 watts. I know me, and if this passive works wonders with the RM 9, I'm going to start thinking about stepped attenuators, transformer/autoformers.... |
That what I am wondering; how does the RM9 compare Atmasphere, CAT, ARC Ref Series, etc.? I willing to believe they are every bot as good (I don't care about the price difference which I think is relevant at this level). I'm listening to the RM10 MK II - the little 35 watter - and it does not give up much to higher priced stuff. Next week I'm bringing the RM10 over to compare with a fella that has the RM9Special - should be interesting as we both own the same speakers. |
I'll say one thing, I've never heard a bad word said about a MR amp by anyone who has owned one. |
I have sold my RM10 and a RM9 MKII is on the way. I am very interested to see how it compares with my CAT JL2 - it owuld be nice to go from 16 output tube to 8; if the sound is of comparable performance. |
Is that the Russian tube sold by Upscale Audio? |
Clio09, are you alos using a passive? I just got a "Pot-in-a-Box" from Roger ($135)and I'll be darn it sounds really good. Better than the Joule? We'll see, I need some time with it, but it is a steal based on sound. |
I have not used a TVC, but did have a Placette RVC and Placette Active at one time. I think Roger's Pot-in-a-Box with 30-year old + Noble potentiometer actually sounds better than the Placette RVC. I am curious about the transformer based passives, but I do wonder why Roger who can build whatever he wants thinks that is not the best approach, especially with his amps. I have to assume that a transformer must add distortion to some degree compared to pure passive volume control, and that it must be less than linear across the frequency spectrum, most notably on the extreme highs and lows - but I'm no engineer. I do know that with my source, short run of Cardas GR (super low capacitance)and both Roger's amps and my CAT JL2 with high sensitivity and high input impedance I have a pretty ideal set-up for a pure passive set-up. I'm not sure that a TVC might not be subtraction by addition in my case. I'll say if you have a RM10 or 9 and you have not tried a passive volume control you owe to yourself to try it, no matter what active linestage you are currently using. And if you are on a budgetm I can't imagine a much better entry level system than a Pot-in-the-Box matched to a used RM10. |
I got the K&K TVC with dual volume controls and it works very well with RM9 and CAT JL2, but the Joule has its own charms so I guess I'll own two preamps (I mean 3) for a while. I placed an order for the RM9 Special Edition, I think EL34 based tubes amps work particularly well with my Merlin VSM-MXes. The Music Reference RM9 is the first tube amp I've had that has me seriously considering selling the CAT, which remains the best amp I have ever heard. |
Chazro, just to let you know. Roger built 18, kept one for himself, and has 5 or 6 left. I will report my observations once I have some time with it. Basic difference from a design perspective is that it is all hardwired, no boards, and uses a 6 tube driver stage (6bq7s) instead of the four 6922/6dj8s. I think he also put in some heavy duty bias pots and other tinkerings. I assume it is his most evloved thinking on the basic Ultralinear (8) EL34 tube design. One advantage over the CAT is I can pick it up:) |
Well I have had the Special Edition and it is a big step up from the MKII - not sure why as the output stage, layout, power supply all remain the same, but Roger completely redesigned the input drivers, making them point-to-point (no more boards) and uses six 6bq7s. The amp outputs 162watts into 8ohms and 200 into 4ohms, so it is more powerful, yet you can still expect 10,000 hours of tube life. This amp is fantastic. Is it better than the CAT JL2? I certainly won't say that; but they are bot first rate and the ergonomic (weight, heat, tube costs) are certainly the RM9 SEs favor. Anyway, I don't know how many of these Roger has left, but he won't be uilding anymore and they are a timeless classic in my book. Like my Merlins, I expect these to be a long time companion. |
I'd like to hear some of the 980 owners of RM9s as to their preference between EL34 and KT88; there seems to be quite a difference of opinion on the issue, and there is a comparison to be made; certainly Roger is not so definitive on the subject. I think in the case of Merlins, their is an expecially strong case to be made for EL34s, but ultimately, it just may be a matter of taste. |
Well, there you have it, the EL34, 6550, and KT88 are the best with the Music Reference. Frankly, I suspect they all sound great with different flavors though I owuld note they were designed with EL34s. I'm not sure how much difference there is between my Special Edition and the MKI&IIs, though they do have completely different driver stages (6 6BQ7s). I think is this is one of those question with no definitive answer that applies beyond the individual with his ears and his system. But I would like to try KT88s some day. |
He should have something soon. Apparently a balanced autoformer design is a bit trickier than with a transformer. I was expecting to prefer the EL34 as well. Does the Avatar also run KT88s, or just EL34s? |
The RAM KT88s are the slight more expensive one's he sells? $65 each? Or are you using the Chineese KT88 he uses? |
What tubes were you using prior? His EL34s? (Siemens?). I take it that if you made a change it was at Roger's suggestion? How did the sound signature change? I guess I could just buy them and try. |
What did the Pot-in-a-Box replace? I use one and a Joule 150MKII. Not bad for $135 - is it? |
I was using a K&K TVC with S&B 102 MKI xformers and dual Sieden switches. An excellent piece, but I can't say I preferred it to the PiaB. I've got the Siemens EL34s in the RM9 SE, and just ordered a set of the KT88 RAMs. I've got some new SED Winged C 6550s that I am also go to try. I usually have 2 or 3 amps, but I think I might like the idea of one amp, three sets of tubes. Fortunately, I don't thing I can really tube roll (not sure why I would) the six 6bq7 driver tubes. |
Has anyone compared 6550 versus KT88 with the unit? They should be pretty similar, no? |
Well, I got Roger's KT88 RAM and let's just say that I sold my back up set of Siemens EL34s (still have the originals). It (RM9SE) sounds like a different amp with the KT88s. Better dynamics, more controlled and tuneful bass, and bigger, more expansive soundstage. I've just ordered a set off the Genalex Gold Lion reissues from Jim McShane - just to see what they are all about. I wasn't expecting to prefer the KT88s, as the RM9SE was built around EL34s, but I personally prefer the amp with them, but I'm keeping the EL34s around.
I also recently bought Bent's new TAP with autoformers which is the best passive I've hard so far (owned Placette RVC and Active, K&K SB102, Goldpoint Attenuator, and Music Ref PiaB - and most recently ARC, CAT, LAMM and Joule tube actives). One heck of a good combination and not very expensive for a SOTA preamp. Passives do work great with the RM9. |
Roger's tubes are amazingly well matched in circuit. It really makes me question some of the folks out there selling "matched" pairs and quads. I won't name names but you do wonder if some of these tubes really are matched. Roger's are for sure. I ordered the Genalex from Jim McShane who seems to have a good reputation for taking care in matching tubes. They arrived last night, and I will run them tonight and check their bias in operation. |
I installed the KT88s (Genalex from Jim McShane) and they bias perfectly (all within 5%) which is very encouraging. He seems to be really matching the sets. The Genelex sound great, but I'm going have to A/B for a while to see if I prefer them to Roger's - it may not matter one bit as the amp sound great with both. I think one can feel comfortable buying from either Roger or Jim - and of course Andy at Vintage Tube Services for NOS. |
Well, I still own the Music Reference RM9 Special Edition, I still love it, and I don't think I will ever sell it. After a few years, I starting missing my RM10 MKIIs, and bought them again this week - if 35 watts is enough power, it gives the RM9SEs a run for their money (the RM9SEs are 5x$$$), but of course the RM9SEs will drive many more speakers, including tough loads (e.g., Theil). They look beautiful, the sound wonderful, and they appear to be made to outlast you. While perfer the Atma-sphere amps with my speakers (Merlin VSMs), there is no way I'm selling the MRs, they are amps you can live with as long as you still listen to music, and the only remorse is if you sell them. |
Clio9, after a lot of experimenting, and too came to the conclusion that with my speakers, the EL34 approach worked best, though the KT88s were pretty darn good, and different sounding, a different amp with that tube change. |
Anthony, there is another one up for sale. I bought the other. I think they will love your speakers. |
|
I asked the question on another forum, you ar sure the 5751 is perfectly ok in the circuit? One thing the RM10 doesn't need is more gain, so I would think that would not be an issue. |
03-07-10: Pubul57
Well, I still own the Music Reference RM9 Special Edition, I still love it, and I don't think I will ever sell it. After a few years, I starting missing my RM10 MKIIs, and bought them again this week - if 35 watts is enough power, it gives the RM9SEs a run for their money (the RM9SEs are 5x$$$).....
You know, with the Merlin VSMs it just might be that the 35watts from the RM10MKII is all I really need. I am even thinking of maybe selling my RM9 Special Edition, if I could convince myself I would not have instant buyer's remorse and the fact the Special Editions never, ever seem to come up for sale as Roger only made 16 and I get the feeling most owners will sell it at an estate sale. But, the RM10 is one hell of amp in my system. |
Well, I did end up selling the RM9SE and kept the RM10 MKII for the summer
months. No question the RM9 is one of the finest tube amps there is, but the
RM10 is a wonderful amp if 35 watts is enough power for you - among the best
IMHO. Truth is, if Roger Modjeski makes it, it will be a good amp. I do wish
Roger would make an active tube line stage to match with the RM10, but he
believes passive is the way to go, and I'm not at all sure that any preamp would
better my Lightspeed Attenuator matched with the RM10, but still...:) |
I hear the sound of the wind coming from the west.....or is it the east? |
Not sure what Roger did from I to II, but I do know that he does makes this changes unless they are real and substantial, so as Clio9 says, that might very well be a worthy improvement - the RM9 is a classic, might as well go to MKII. |
You should go to AudioCircle and join the Music Reference forum, you'll find lots of answers to your questions, and a possible reply from Roger himself, or Music Reference lunatics that know the equipment well.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=circles |
"transparent and neutral presentation" seems to be his design goal, with no apologies to SS, but with the bloom you can only get with tubes. |
"I sadly regret selling that amp." You don't know how many times I have heard former MR owners say that... fortunately it is still easy to get RM10s. |
