A 40-year-old preamp outperforms the new, acclaimed "got to have" one, which is about par for what is available today. Most of the major manufactures around that timeframe made great premium audio gear that still rivals or beats new gear. Manufactures figured out how to build near perfect audio amplifiers back in the 70s and 80s. From that point on, there is not much room left for improvement that will make any sonic différance, regardless of what they claim. Enjoy the wonderful vintage audio equipment. I do.
Thank you for commenting. I would agree with you other than having new features like built in DACS or streamers. The one time I thought another preamp sounded better was because I accidentally had the C1 set for Mono. I am a gear guy like it sounds you are, and a lot of vintage gear looks and sounds great.
@@vintageaudioreview Yeah, I am a gear guy too. While no remote control, they do have some nice knobs to turn and buttons to push. You have some great test gear. My HP distortion analyser quit working and been to buy to look at it.
@@multicyclist I have some basic test gear but always want more. Sorry to hear about your HP analyzer. I have a video describing how to add a remote control volume device to your vintage gear....
I bought my C1 new. I had failure of the plastic around the RCA jacks within a few years. While Carver repaired it under warranty, unfortunately replaced them with the same failure prone part. They, of course, failed again out of warranty. So now looking for a high quality replacement part.
Thanks for sharing your experience and glad you still have it. No such problems with my C1. My guess is that one could fine some gold plated rca jacks for it, though I am not 100% positive- it should be something worth investigating as the C1 is a great preamp, IMHO.
@@sirsuse I understand that! My buddy Ian & I swapped Carver CT-Sevens for just that reason- he traded my a black faced one for my silver faced one which matched his Carver amp..
I bought a C-1 from a buy sell trade shop in the late 1990's, for 75$ US currency. I used it for the Sonic Holography function to enhance my live music performances I was recording at that time for distribution to my customers. If I recall correctly there was a warning on the rear panel to not do this. For that purpose it worked very well. To clarify further, I remember the Phase Linear equipment Bob Carver designed. I feel his products produced a lot of bang for the bucks $$ , but overall some of the stuff was just junk. Thanks for another great video.
Thank you so much for taking the time to share. And thanks for the compliment. I just looked and there is no warning on the back of the C1 about what you were doing- maybe in the owner's manual mentions it. There are a lot of folks that like both Pase Linear and Craver gear, me being one of them but i would not call myself a Carver "fan boy"
Very enjoyable review. Thanks. I never am able to hear subtle differences during A to B switching tests. But I can detect subtle differences when playing a passage I know well on one amp and then playing the same passage again through another. But during AB swtch tests, I can't detect subtle changes, but I can detect obvious differences, of course.
Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts, Scott. With the exception of speakers, I have found that my "audio memory" is not good enough to remember differences between any gear except speakers, and that is a general impression. I just finished doing an A/B test between a pair of tube monoblock amps vs a more modern Solid state amp. There were 8 listeners involved, which is not statistically significant, but did provide a starting point. It will be the subject of an upcoming video. You could instantly switch between the amps so there was no audio memory involved- I am sure you will find it "entertaining"..
This kind of review means something. I want to see graphs and measurements. I would however like to see 5Hz to 100 Khz. I know our ears are about 20 to 20Kz, but the wider the amps frequently response the easier it is for the amp to delver an output within that spectrum. Also the music sounds cleaner and more defined the wider the spectrum an amp can reproduce.
Thanks for taking the time to write a well thought out comment. To be honest, part of the reason I don't go past 20khz (most of the time) or below 20Hz is that a lot of the older gear is not spec'd there. Now, a lot of vintage gear lists frequency responses to 100khz and 5hz as well, but they tend not to look very good there. I will investigate using a wider frequency range for the frequency response plots- depends on my analyzer- maybe 10hz-50hz... I am not sure I agree your statement about the wider frequency responses sounding cleaner and more refined- sounds like an idea for a future video... I am working on a video comparing tube vs solid state amp sound, and the same a/b method could be applied to (vintage) amps with much different bandwidths...
@@vintageaudioreview If an amp can amplify a frequency well below 20 Hz. When it's producing sound in the 20 to 20k range it's going to be less compressed and not add as much distortion. You probably won't be able to tell the difference between a lot of amplifiers using small drivers. If you're using speakers with 15 inch woofers. You can more readily hear the limitations on most amplifiers. Typically amplifiers with a wide frequency response have a higher damping factor. That alone gives more detail to the music in my opinion. The bar I use for sound is my memory of having the pioneer 1980 and the sansui z9000x. If you're ever able to listen to either of these receivers I encourage you to bring your favorite music and hopefully you'll have speakers with 15 inch drivers to listen with. Currently the only amps that had any acceptable sound to me are my Crown 650 watt per channel amp and my 500 wattx2 powered mixer. To me, having 15, 18 or 21 inch woofers provided a whole new experience, and provide and musical emersion that 6 and 1/2 inch woofers cant provide. Anyway Thank you for being so thorough with your measurements. I hope you have a great night...Rick
@@rickhunt3183 You will be happy to know that I did a check and can test from 10hz-40khz, and in fact, just finished measuring an integrated amps frequency response for an upcoming video over that range and will do more testing over that range in the future. One of my speakers does have a 15" woofer- there is more to good bass then just having a big woofer, though it helps. I have been measuring output impedance (& hence damping factor) on amplifiers for a while and have had amps (mainly tube amps) with low damping factors sound pretty darn good. Maybe one day I will get in the receivers you mentioned. Thaks again for your insights.
@@vintageaudioreview I'm right there with you when you when you say it takes more than having a 15 inch woofer. It's having the right 15 inch and the right combination of crossover and box. I confess that I love bass, but it has to clean and clear. I started out like anyone else thinking 20 watts rms was plenty, and that my meager sound system sounded good. Then I started going to concerts that had great sound systems and ran the kind of power that made your ears ring for 3 days. I'm sure you have experienced that many times also. After listening to that equipment my sound system sounded terrible to me. I think we're always looking for the right equipment and right combination of components to give us that perfect sound. At least within our financial limits. After working with professional audio equipment. That's all I use anymore. All my cables are XLR, and my speaker wires are cables with speakon connectors. I'm glad to see that you're as passionate about sound as I am. Thank you for the interaction and conversation.
@@rickhunt3183 I haven't been to a real concert the B52's in 1982- sometimes hear live at some street fair or venue that I just happen to be at. I don't have any XLR cables, mainly because most of my gear is vintage w/out XLR inputs. I am fortunate to have some friends with a variety of gear to listen and test. I probably just have one big purchase left on my audio bucket list- an amplifier with big blue meters 😄
I bought a C1 and a Phase Linear 400 used decades ago and still have no idea what exactly sonic holography does. Some recordings sound lovely with the SH turned on, some sound like crap and on some it makes no difference. Linda Ronstadt's " Dedicated to the One I Love" CD is one that sounds great with the SH on. Speakers have been Infinity SM150s and Polk 10s. A question please, I just ordered a Dayton Audio BTR 02 bluetooth reciever and wonder where would be best to plug it in?
Thanks for the questions. SH is going to work on some songs better than other, like you pointed out- that's normal. Speaker placement is key and takes a bit of doing to get it optimum- the C1 manual helps a lot- there is a Facebook Page for Carver Preamps that is a good resource. You would connect your Dayton Audio to the Aux1, Aux2 or Tuner input on your C1.
Thanks for the question and this one I can answer. As far as the sound, very little difference from when I did an a/b test between them. The tuner in the CT7 can be "flakey"- at least the FM tuner. THe C1 has more inputs and a MC phono input as well. The CT7 has a midrange control. The C1 has more sonic holography options. OF course, the CT has a remote, which is big. I am re-connecting my CT7 to the components right now after an amp swap.
That is a very good question and thanks for asking it! The c4000 that I tested sounded just fine and they have more capabilities than the C1, but I think that my C1 sounded better or worked better as I had worked on it a bit- caps and such. I would love to own a C4000t at some point. My guess is that were I to a/b with the tone controls out and not processing, they would sound pretty much the same....
@@vintageaudioreview Appreciate your reply recounting your experience with the c4000 and C1. I'm newly retired and have been slightly afflicted with the vintage audio bug. I have no frame of reference for this stuff but certainly have an appreciation for the science, engineering, methods, theories, risks, innovation, etc related to this field. I asked the question of you in the first place to hopefully validate my decision to purchase a pristine C1 (heading up HWY 5 to me as we speak). I 'm also waiting for a response from a seller/original owner in Aptos who is selling a c4000. Appreciate you sharing your knowledge and experience via your channel.
Thanks for the comment but I respectfully disagree.. The Holograph effect does not aways make a difference, but when it does I think it is very enjoyable and impressive. The EQ that you mentioned are just separate bass and treble controls (1 for each channel) and just add or take away bass- to make some fine adjustments and their judicious use should not make the sound "mushy"
@@vintageaudioreview Thanks for explanation of preamps 101. The frequency points Crazy Bob chose to boost and cut are terrible points to do that at. "Holography" is a psychoacoustic effect dealing with phasing and summing. It's bells and whistles. Plus you can't see a darn thing you're doing on the C-1 and the 4000t. No matter what color of face you fit. The C-1 and 4000t have a very robust and thick sound. But the buttons are reversed. On or engaged should be IN and unengaged should be out. But they're reversed. I prefer NAD and another brand that I'm not going to mention to keep the prices down. I know the Carver line and it's a love/hate. But the hype is nauseating. All these new jacks jumped on the band wagon and pushed the prices way up and the amps sound stressed. They do blow away what a receiver sounds like by miles. But holography is fiddly and it's a toy and a frill. You want to listen to the music or you want to play games and toy around with the music? After all that wears off and you grow up you'll want a preamp with an On and Off button and a volume knob. That's it. No little goofy bells and whistles that just messes up the music. It's fun at first until it's not.
@@SamplingPercussion I noted the that the displays are very, very hard to read in my description and agree with you. I do not consider myself a Carver Fanboy with everything that he did, but his gear is very popular and he has a large fanbase- and most of what I have used and heard is great. Never really thought much about the button positions other than them being hard to read. The NAD integrated amp that I own (3130) did a pretty good job for me. I am an Engineer by trade and like playing games with knobs and meters on my audio gear as needed, and listening to the result. If I needed more specific points than those provided by the C1's bas and treble controls I would use an equalizer that I have in my system. For most of my listening, I keep the Holographic effect on. I appreciate your comments, even though we have different views on some points.
@@vintageaudioreview My favorite thing Bob Carver did on a couple preamps that nobody talks about is on the C-6, C-16, C-19 is the two External Processor inputs. Holy cow! That is something else! Now we’re talking fun as far as bells and whistles go. Since you’re an engineer do you know if those are wired in series or parallel? I could never get a definitive answer on the forums. So if you ran EQ on external input #1 would that pass through on input loop #2? Or do they run in parallel and then summed at the Main Outs 1 and 2? I guess if I could read schematics I could tell. Way cool feature.
@@SamplingPercussion There is a CT-6 tuner/preamp but not a C6 preamp from what I saw. I pulled the schematic for the C-19 and it looks like the Ext Processor loops would add the desired effect- I would not look at them as wired either serial or parallel- the schematic is split in sections and it is hard to follow. From the owner's manual " They are intended for use with outboard signal processors such a equalizers, dynamic expanders, etc. They can be used in place of a third tape deck without the dubbing feature.
