Hard to beat the price/performance of a (digital) Cary Cinema 11 IMO -- how much are you willing to spend?


Cost no objest I'd pick an Audio Research MP1 ($10k?)
http://www.audioresearch.com/MP1.html


If you can't find a multchannel pre to your liking and ONLY use mutichannel from discrete multichannel inputs already decoded, you can use three relatively inexpensive tube stereo pre's -- e.g. three Prima Luna's -- to pre six channels (I'm not rec'ing this, just mentioning it as an option)


You get a lot more for your money, IMO, with the better digital equipment.


It's long, but have you read through this thread?
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=707173

 

Thanks for that link! I actually hadn't seen the thread, so I'm reading it as soon as I type this response. I'm only 24 hrs into becoming aware that there is such a thing as these units, but from what I read last night, the McCormack MAP-1 is pretty much exactly what I'm looking for - best I can tell. The Bel Canto pre-6 is probably my second piece of interest because it is (apparently) a step up in sound quality and it has individual (digital) channel level settings for the 5.1 analog inputs.


Can you tell me why you think a digital piece would be more bang for my buck? Basically I've been on the fence between going with a nice 2-channel pre to mate with my Butler hybrid amp or jumping into a higher end pre/pro. These analog MC preamps seem to give me the best of both worlds - audiophile quality preamp with a pair of analog MC inputs for whatever two surround sound application(s) I want to run.


As far as money, I'd say my price point is around $2k and I'm focused on a used piece of gear. I've heard great things about the Cary line, I just don't know how much value I place on video scaling and switching at this point. Not that I couldn't use it, but audio quality is paramount for me and I like simplicity. I feel like with either of the two units I mentioned above, I'd be paying for exactly what I'd be utilizing, you know? Not spending money on a bunch of features I'll never take advantage of.

 

This is a quote by the OP in that thread you linked to...he articulates himself very well here and it's a great summation of what I'm focused on, as well:

In the mid range of pre/pros nothing we heard came close to the Cinema 6. It does have some very annoying quirks in terms of setup and useability but when it sounds so damned good you quickly forget about that.

The more a processor tries to do the more opportunity there is for things to go wrong. Drop the tuners, drop the video switching and keep things to a minimalist level with short signal paths, good DACs and OPamps and PAY ATTENTION TO THE ANALOGUE section and you should have a very good sounding piece.


I only want to go with a digital pre/pro if it's spectacular in terms of music reproduction, but I'm certainly open to it. Sounds like the Cary stuff is something I should really consider since you're both high on it.

 

Ain't no nasty video circuits in the Cary!

http://www.caryaudio.com/graphics/pr...1_back_800.jpg


Cary Cinema 11 thread here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=809659


I'm unfamiliar with the Bel Canto and McCormack units you mention but both companies have good musical reputations so more research might be required

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa /forum/post/11960234


I didn't even realize these things existed until just today. This may be the perfect solution for me, as I really want to incorporate a high end preamp, but wouldn't mind retaining the capability of surround sound.


Is anyone using one of these things?

Another option is a 2-ch preamp with a HT bypass loop - if your needs for the high end preamp are stereo only.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by ggunnell /forum/post/11963012


Ain't no nasty video circuits in the Cary!

http://www.caryaudio.com/graphics/pr...1_back_800.jpg


Cary Cinema 11 thread here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=809659


I'm unfamiliar with the Bel Canto and McCormack units you mention but both companies have good musical reputations so more research might be required

Yep, the Cary stuff definitely has my attention...


Another MC analog that seems to be quite good (per the reviews) is the McIntosh C-45. At first I thought it was a tube unit, so I got excited, but I think it's just a SS.


That Zissou guy in the other thread (the one you linked) seems quite smitten with the Proceed AVP2....of course, that's as of page 7 in the thread....still have like 80 more pages to go LOL


EDIT: Oh, that's weird....I didn't even realize that about the 11...I saw something on the company's website about how their gear is great for the discerning videophile or something like that and figured it had lots of fancy video switching and such....cool!

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by whoaru99 /forum/post/11963043


Another option is a 2-ch preamp with a HT bypass loop - if your needs for the high end preamp are stereo only.

True....and I haven't ruled that out, for sure. I'd really like to keep things as simple as possible (I'm weird like that, I guess lol), but if all else fails I'll just keep my Outlaw processor for MC stuff and pick up a nice stereo preamp for music. What happened was that I recently installed some room treatments, and it cleared up where all the remaining deficiencies in my gear were. I've identified the Outlaw as the remaining weak link in my 2-channel signal path, though it's fine for movies.


I just feel my amp and speakers far out-class my preamp section, so I want to fix that in the next few weeks or so, you know? But thanks for reminding me about the HT bypass option...sometimes I forget I can still do that

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa /forum/post/11960234


I didn't even realize these things existed until just today. This may be the perfect solution for me, as I really want to incorporate a high end preamp, but wouldn't mind retaining the capability of surround sound.


Is anyone using one of these things?

I have used and commented on most of them in my column (link below).

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa /forum/post/11960234


I didn't even realize these things existed until just today. This may be the perfect solution for me, as I really want to incorporate a high end preamp, but wouldn't mind retaining the capability of surround sound.


Is anyone using one of these things?

I have used and commented on most of them in my column (link below).

Hello, I use a Mcintosh C45 and running a 7.1 DVD player
through it for movies. Some people wish for digital inputs.
No sweat, just connect a nice home theater to it via the other
6 channel input. Connect all your digital to that. Sounds perfect
Enjoy!

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson /forum/post/11963444


I have used and commented on most of them in my column (link below).

Thanks, Kal. I saw a couple of your responses in the pre/pro thread (Im on page 16, lol) and I noticed that you had some experience with...was it the McCormack MAP? My brain is so fried after reading that thread so intently that I have pre/pros dancing around my brain! This site never fails to provide me with all the info I need, though....no doubt about that!


I look forward to reading more about your thoughts on these pieces! Looks like you have quite a few submissions...do you know off hand which of your issues discusses the MC analog pres?

 

Many. They are discussed individually so you will have to scan them all or use the (admittedly poor) search engine for specific devices. Sorry.

 

That's okay, I found the first one....Issue #2 from '03. I'm having a hard time figuring your take on it (McCormack MAP-1), to be honest. It seems like you consider it a solid piece, but perhaps unspectacular? Based on what you wrote, it seems as if it does exactly what I would expect it to do, which definitely suits my needs....but I'm interested in SPECTACULAR! lol


I dunno, unless there is a clear likelihood that 5.1+ analog outs won't be available on DVD/MC audio players, I just don't see why I WOULDN'T want one of these things. I need to learn more about them, for sure.

 

This Zissou guy in the other thread must have the same ears as I do....looks like he's very fond of my Butler 5150, too...it's always nice to know that someone else hears/appreciates the same qualities in a piece of gear as you do

I love my Butler amp...

 

Kal: I see you have the Bel Canto pre6....still pretty happy with it?


Also, do you know of any multi-channel analog tube preamps?

 

Maybe I'm missing something.

Wouldn't a high-quality pre-amp that featured multichannel analog inputs also feature digital audio inputs? And, unless your DVD player featured multichannel analog outputs AND better sound quality than the high-quality pre-amp, and unless we're talking about the hirez formats that must be passed via multichannel analog connections, wouldn't you want to utilize a digital connection and let the high-quality pre-amp do the decoding? What am I missing, here?

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim /forum/post/11965042


Maybe I'm missing something.

Unless we're talking about the hirez formats, wouldn't a high-quality pre-amp that featured multichannel analog inputs also feature digital audio inputs? And, unless your DVD player featured multichannel analog outputs AND better sound quality than the high-quality pre-amp, wouldn't you want to utilize a digital connection and let the high-quality pre-amp do the decoding? What am I missing, here?

These units are strictly analog. There are no DACs. When you run a digital connection from your source to a digital preamp/processor, you're utilizing the preamps DACs. In this case, I would be allowing the source (CD player, DVD player, SACD, etc) to use its own decoding and DACs, and then pass the analog signal to the preamp. Basically these units are audiophile quality (stereo) preamps that also have 5.1 analog inputs added.


I'm sure most people don't get as excited about them as I do, lol.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa /forum/post/11965075


These units are strictly analog. There are no DACs. When you run a digital connection from your source to a digital preamp/processor, you're utilizing the preamps DACs. In this case, I would be allowing the source (CD player, DVD player, SACD, etc) to use its own decoding and DACs, and then pass the analog signal to the preamp. Basically these units are audiophile quality (stereo) preamps that also have 5.1 analog inputs added.

I see. But didn't you say the Bel Canto had individual, DIGITAL channel level settings? And even if you had one of these units, if you were doing the decoding at your multichannel player, wouldn't you still be 'at the mercy' of that player's quality. You'd want a very high-quality multichannel player, too, wouldn't you? Otherwise, you're just shooting yourself in the foot, no?

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim /forum/post/11965140


I see. But didn't you say the Bel Canto had individual, DIGITAL channel level settings? And even if you had one of these units, if you were doing the decoding at your multichannel player, wouldn't you still be 'at the mercy' of that player's quality. You'd want a very high-quality multichannel player, too, wouldn't you? Otherwise, you're just shooting yourself in the foot, no?

Sorry, I probably didn't explain it properly about the digital aspect. My understanding is that it's a digitized control mechanism as far as adjusting channel/trim levels. It's not any sort of digital processing of the signal that's taking place. It's strictly analog.


And you're exactly correct...this would mean you would need to have quality sources plugged into the thing. The way I look at it, I'd rather be upgrading/changing my source every so often as opposed to replacing my preamp/processor. Five years down the road, the foundation of my system will be able to remain the same (assuming I went with one of these analog MC preamps), and all I'd have to do is plug in whatever new source has the most current multi-channel processing. And in addition to that, I still have an audiophile grade preamp for my 2-channel listening, which is my priority anyway.


People who are more focused on HT and less so on 2-channel music probably wouldn't have an iota of interest in building a system this way. But while I spend more time with movies than I do music, I want the best quality 2-channel system I can put together, while still having the capability of surround sound.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa /forum/post/11965239


And you're exactly correct...this would mean you would need to have quality sources plugged into the thing. The way I look at it, I'd rather be upgrading/changing my source every so often as opposed to replacing my preamp/processor. Five years down the road, the foundation of my system will be able to remain the same (assuming I went with one of these analog MC preamps), and all I'd have to do is plug in whatever new source has the most current multi-channel processing. And in addition to that, I still have an audiophile grade preamp for my 2-channel listening, which is my priority anyway. People who are more focused on HT and less so on 2-channel music probably wouldn't have an iota of interest in building a system this way. But while I spend more time with movies than I do music, I want the best quality 2-channel system I can put together, while still having the capability of surround sound.

But, I doubt seriously that multichannel analog outputs are going to be around for very much longer. Very shortly, they're going to be a thing of the past. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if 2-channel analog connections disappear a few more years down the road. I know the analog die-hards will resist it, but as digital amplifiers become more refined and their practicality fully realized, particularly for multichannel (and, who knows how many channels that will be) playback, the desire to keep everything in the digital domain until the final analog 'conversion' occurs at the digital amps' speaker outputs will be the driving force behind all the technology.


It's coming. The development of HDMI connection capability and the 'unification' that that capability provides (although problematic today) is only the tip of the iceberg. 2-channel analog source devices may be around for a while, but source devices capable of multichannel (and, again, who knows how many channels that will be) analog output aren't going to be around much longer. How many multichannel analog inputs do these high-quality analog-only pre-amps have, anyway? Your fancy multichannel analog pre-amp is going to be outdated sooner than you think.


Something to think about.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim /forum/post/11965345


But, I doubt seriously that multichannel analog outputs are going to be around for very much longer. Very shortly, they're going to be a thing of the past. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if 2-channel analog connections disappear a few more years down the road. I know the analog die-hards will resist it, but as digital amplifiers become more refined and their practicality fully realized, particularly for multichannel (and, again, who knows how many channels that will be) playback, the desire to keep everything in the digital domain until the final analog 'conversion' occurs at the digital amps' speaker outputs will be the driving force behind all the technology.


It's coming. The development of HDMI connection capability and the 'unification' that that capability provides (although problematic today) is only the tip of the iceberg. 2-channel analog source devices may be around for a while, but source devices capable of multichannel (and who knows how many channels that will be) analog output aren't going to be around much longer. How many multichannel analog inputs do these high-quality analog-only pre-amps have, anyway? Your fancy multichannel analog pre-amp is going to be outdated sooner than you think.


Something to think about.

I'm not sure how to respond to this

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa /forum/post/11965384


I'm not sure how to respond to this

There's really no way to respond to it. It may sound great, now, but the idea that you'll be 'future-proofed', as quickly as things are changing now, is a bit optimistic. Soon, even if multichannel analog outputs remain for a few more years, the number of inputs that your pre-amp provides will most likely not be enough for the number of channels we'll then be capable of.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim /forum/post/11965406


There's really no way to respond to it. It may sound great, now, but the assumption that you'll be 'future-proofed', as quickly as things are changing now, is a bit optimistic.

Dude, as I stated above, I've known about these things for a little over a day, lol. I started this thread to gather more info about them and to see if anyone else is using them. You sound like you're part of the digital Borg collective or something..."Your fancy multichannel analog pre-amp is going to be outdated sooner than you think."

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa /forum/post/11964745


Kal: I see you have the Bel Canto pre6....still pretty happy with it?

Definitely.

Quote:
Also, do you know of any multi-channel analog tube preamps?

Conrad-Johnson. There's another very obscure European one but I cannot recall the name.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa /forum/post/11965384


I'm not sure how to respond to this

I do. I agree.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa /forum/post/11965479


Dude, as I stated above, I've known about these things for a little over a day, lol. I started this thread to gather more info about them and to see if anyone else is using them. You sound like you're part of the digital Borg collective or something..."Your fancy multichannel analog pre-amp is going to be outdated sooner than you think."

Sorry if I came off too strongly. Didn't mean to. I wasn't digging at you when I said "Your fancy.............". But I do think the points I was trying to make are pertinent. Just trying to help, actually. Didn't mean to be an A55.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim /forum/post/11967158


Sorry if I came off too strongly. Didn't mean to. I wasn't digging at you when I said "Your fancy.............". But I do think the points I was trying to make are pertinent. Just trying to help, actually. Didn't mean to be an A55.

lol, no problem