 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
A MODIFIED MINGDA MC-7R TUBE PREAMPLIFIER
The Mingda MC-7R is a Chinese-made, distinctively styled, tube stereo line-
stage preamplifier. This modified example of the MC-7R was offered to me
a by a friend of the web site who thought I would find it interesting to
listen to. He was absolutely right.
It is the first Mingda product that I have heard, but given the amount of
equipment they make, it probably will not be the last.
I did some web surfing and found that the MC-7R has a list price of $599;
I found it readily available for $499. I was surprised to be honest; I would
have guess that it was more expensive given the apparent quality of its
construction.
DESCRIPTION
The Mingda MC-7R is an impressive piece of equipment. Immediately
obvious is the massive crackle-finished transformer cover with the Mingda
logo. Stainless steel wraps around the chassis itself, ala DeLorean; the
black front and rear fascia are 8mm thick. The MC-7R feels very dense and
weighs about 21 pounds. I measured the length at about 15 inches, the
width at just under 9 inches, and the height at 8.5 inches, thanks to its tall
rectifier tube. Click here for a photo.
The front of the preamp has the on/off switch, volume control, and source
selector switch. On the right side of the unit (facing it) and at the front are
the four pairs of input jacks. This might seem like an odd place to locate
the inputs but it actually makes a lot of sense. The inputs connect right at
the selector switch. The signal does not have to travel from the rear to the
front of the unit and potentially pick up noise in the process. The trade-off
is that longer interconnects are needed. Click here for a photo.
On the rear of the unit are two sets of output jacks (pretty much standard
equipment any more) and an IEC AC connection. While one of the source
inputs is labeled “Tape,” there are no record-out jacks. The input and
output jacks look to be of good quality. The tube sockets appear to be
ceramic. The volume control has a quality feel. The only things that seem
cost-accounted are the feet, which look like metal but are molded plastic.
The tube complement consists of a 12AX7 and 12AU7 tube per channel.
The Mingda most distinctive feature is the large Chinese-made 274B*
rectifier tube located in the center of the unit, just in front of the
transformer cover. The styling is definitely unique, whatever you might
think of its aesthetics.
MODIFICATIONS
I used this Mingda while listening to the Quad 21L2 speakers. In that
article, I stated that the Mingda was heavily modified. Well, as Bill Clinton
might say, “define heavily modified.” Here is what I understand to have
been done: The input and output coupling capacitors have been replaced
by AuriCaps. The rest of the caps have been bypassed using Sonic Craft
capacitors. The Mingda has also been cryo-treated—taken down to about
-300° Fahrenheit and then brought back to ambient temperature. You
decide how modified that makes it.
I did not open the unit up. I feared that if I checked out the inside of the
unit, it might prejudice me in some way. It is hard enough to avoid forming
some sort of initial opinion based on the external appearance of a
component.
SET UP
The Mingda started out in my living room system. It was immediately
obvious that it was far quieter through the VTL and Quads than my old
Audio Experiment preamp.
The Mingda had been on for a several hours. I was switching CDs right in
front of it when I detected an odd noise. It was sort of a rattling sound,
like little-bitty** metal pieces hitting each other. It took me a minute to
locate the sound—it was coming from the rectifier tube. I could hear it
from as far as three feet away if I concentrated on it but not at my listening
seat.
The next day, before I turned the Mingda on, I took one of the silicone
damping rings from a 6L6 in the VTL amp and applied it to the bump on
the top of the 274B rectifier tube. It fit perfectly. The rattling noise was
still there but was now only audible up to about a foot away. I left the
damper on for all of my listening. Having the damper on or off did not
change the sound of the preamp in any way that I could detect. Other
than the rectifier tube, the Mingda was silent mechanically and through
both my systems. It worked perfectly the whole time that I had it.
Click here for a photo.
I did my initial listening to the MC-7R with the stock Chinese tubes supplied
with the preamp. The soundstage was very open, well detached from the
Quads, with clean treble, tight bass, and excellent depth. Vocals were very
well centered. Everything sounded very good but I did notice a slight
flatness to Diana Krall’s voice that made her sound somewhat less realistic
than usual. I substituted some used Westinghouse 12AX7s and Ei 12AU7s
for the Chinese tubes just to see how they sounded. They eliminated this
relatively slight deficiency. I used these tubes only while the preamp was in
the living room system.
The Mingda provided a lot of enjoyment in my living room and was very
helpful getting a grip on the sound of the Quad speakers. To really hear
what the Mingda could do, though, I had to get it into my main system.
SERIOUS LISTENING
I was in Chicago in early April and I picked up a Shunyata Venom AC cord
at Music Direct while I was there. This cord is now being used on the Audio
Experience +R preamp in my main system so it was used with the Mingda
as well.
I spent a couple of days listening to my main system just to recalibrate my
ears after so much time spent with the living room system. As good as the
living room system has become, the main system still offers noticeably
more detail, subtlety, bass, and soundstage size.
I recently put new Electro Harmonix 12AX7 tubes in the Audio Experience
+R preamp (hereafter referred to as the AE) and it is sounding very good.
I received a pair of EH 12AU7s with the Mingda so I installed these along
with two new 12AX7s of my own for my comparison listening. I felt that
listening to both preamps with virtually new EH tubes would help them
sound their best and I would be listening for differences between the
preamps and not the tubes. I did switch the EH 12AX7s between the two
preamps while doing my listening and heard no difference as a result. I
tried some other 12AX7s as well and, frankly, neither preamp seems
particularly sensitive to the tubes it is running. Some really high end NOS
tubes might improve the sound of either preamp but they certainly are not
necessary to get excellent sound from either.
A FEW WORDS ABOUT THE AUDIO EXPERIENCE +R PREAMP
This preamp has been my reference since November 2006. I think it is very
good sounding despite being a relatively inexpensive, simple preamp. It
images incredibly well and has excellent top to bottom continuity.
I intended to write an article on it but have never gotten it done. Shortly
after getting the AE broken-in, in late 2006, my Rogue Stereo 90 amplifier
failed and had to be rebuilt. When the Rogue returned, it had to be
broken-in. Then there were power cord changes, tube changes, and RCA
plugs that I was listening to. When I finally got back to the AE in the fall of
2007, its power supply capacitors failed and I had to replace them. When
that was done, the AE sounded better than ever but could no longer be
considered a stock component. I also had nothing with which to compare it
at this point. The AE was clearly much better than the seven year old
Audio Experiment*** preamp it replaced so writing about how much better
the AE was seemed fairly pointless. As the AE has been my reference,
however, discussing its sound is unavoidable while discussing the sound of
the Mingda.
Externally the AE preamp is nicely finished, if not quite to the level of the
Mingda. Internally, the AE offers remote volume control and remote input
switching, which the Mingda does not. The AE also has a balance control,
which I never use but feel more comfortable having. The AE uses a 6X4
rectifier tube and three 12AX7s. The interior parts quality is very high.
The remote volume control is, if I understand it correctly, a resistor ladder
type. It inserts only one resistor in the signal path at any given time. This
may be incorrect on my part but is the best information that I can infer
from the AE website. www.ys-audio.com
LISTENING
I readjusted my ears to my main system by listening to variety of CDs—
acoustic, jazz, classical, and vocal.
I began my listening with the AE preamp in the system.
With this preamp, I get a very wide, deep, well-defined soundstage with
excellent low-level detail. On the Keith Jarrett CD, The Out-of-Towners
(ECM 1900), there is an extended drum solo on Track 3. During this solo
the drummer, Jack deJohnette, taps a solo cymbal with decreasing
loudness. I found myself sitting forward in my seat concentrating to hear
the cymbal as its sound got softer and softer. With the AE, I could hear all
the way down to the lowest level in the recording with no problem
whatsoever. The cymbal at that point is being played extremely softly. Yet
it is still obvious that it is a cymbal, and not some other metallic object
being struck, and its sound exists within a realistic acoustic environment.
Sometimes what I hear through my system surprises even me.
While discussing low-level information, I have heard differences between
tubes, RCA plugs, power cords, DACs, and digital cables readily through
the AE. Hearing these differences, in some cases, took some real work,
but the information was there to hear.
As far as bass and treble are concerned, the AE seems to reproduce
exactly what is on the recording. The bass in my system has always varied
from recording to recording. I think this is a good thing. Homogenized
one-note bass is not something I am looking for from my system, however
deep or loud that bass may be. I have recordings that sound bass-shy
and others where you want to turn the bass down. Fortunately, most
recordings fall within a less extreme range that sounds very good and very
solid. I get bass that can be felt as well as heard.
Treble reproduction is very clean. Cymbals sound metallic with a nice sheen
that, depending upon the recording, varies from good to extremely good.
The overtones on high-pitched instruments are reproduced very clearly.
There is no confusing an oboe with a clarinet or flute playing in their
highest registers. Violin sounds very good with no trace of shrillness.
Of course, with tubes, it is really all about the midrange. I have a great
many jazz CDs that feature female vocalists and I cannot think of one that
does not sound beautiful through my system. Different from each other—
absolutely—but still beautiful.
Male vocals sound very good also. Pavarotti, Jackson Browne, Johnny
Cash, Willie Nelson, John Mayer, and Frank Sinatra all sound very natural
and present in my room.
Overall, I think the AE sounds pretty darn good, not just for its price, but
in absolute terms.
So what happened when the modified Mingda went into my main system?
My system got better.
LISTENING TO THE MINGDA
I did not expect this. I expected that the modded Mingda MC-7R would
probably be close to the AE in sound quality but not better.
The sound of the two preamps is very very similar by just about any
criteria that you want to apply but the Mingda moves low-level details
through the system better. This additional detail results in both a more
realistic midrange and soundstage.
These are not huge differences but they are the kind of differences that
matter to me and I am sure to anyone reading this article.
I recently purchased Jackson Browne’s CD, solo acoustic vol. 2 (Inside
Recordings INR8021-9). I loved vol. 1 and vol. 2 is also very good. On
this CD, through the modified Mingda, I can hear the audience requests
and comments much more easily and clearly than I could with the AE.
Jackson talks about owning guitars on track 6. He refers to the number of
guitars owned by Steven Stills (some years ago) as “the most decadent
thing I had ever heard of.” When he finishes a voice in the audience says
rather sarcastically, “Look at the stage” referring to all of the guitars
Jackson has brought with him. This remark was not intelligible through the
AE but it was with the Mingda. The Mingda did not bring clarity to all the
comments on this CD, obviously, but did illuminate a number of them.
True, this is not music but, in my experience, it is usually in the non-
musical information that you first notice the differences between
components. Then you hear the differences in the music itself.
This ability to better hear low-level details carried over to most vocals that I
listened to. Female vocalists, in particular, sound more real through the
Mingda and the acoustic space around them seems to be better integrated
into the overall soundstage. Most systems, mine included, tend to break
the acoustic space into sections. There is the vocalist section; the bass
section, the drum section, and so forth. The Mingda better integrates
these sections into a single acoustic space. This improvement tends to
make the soundstage seem less precise initially but, with extended
listening, this proves not to be the case. The soundstage is still there, as
wide and deep as ever, just less fragmented.
On the Once soundtrack (Canvasback/Columbia/Sony 88697 10586 2),
both Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova sound more natural while the words
they sing are more intelligible. Where they sing together, it is easier to
follow them individually.
A CD that I am particularly fond of is Dena Derose’s A Walk in the Park
(Maxjazz MXJ502). It is wonderfully musical while offering reference quality
sound. Ms. Derose is not only a fine singer and pianist, she is a song
writer, composer, and arranger as well. She really should be better
known. Her voice and piano both sounded more natural through the
Mingda. The acoustic space around her was more atmospheric and open as
well.
I have six more pages of notes that I could go through, recording by
recording, further repeating what I am talking about. I do not think that is
necessary. The fact is that I heard the same sort of improvement through
the Mingda on virtually everything I listened to—Handel, Charles Lloyd, Holly
Cole, KD Lang, Benjamin Britten, or Gidon Kremer. Sure, it was easier to
hear on some recordings than others but it was there pretty much
everywhere. On the few recordings where I heard no improvement, the
Mingda was as good as the AE.
There has to be some sort of drawback to the Mingda’s sound, right?
Throughout my listening, I felt that the Mingda might emphasize sibilance
very slightly in comparison to the AE. I am still not sure whether this is
actually the case or whether it is a by-product of the improved detail. I am
inclined to believe the latter. In any case, it is not a distraction.
WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE THINGS?
Well, to begin with, it leaves me needing a better preamp.
I have struggled with the AE to determine where it competes in the overall
hierarchy of sound quality. And now I have heard something subtly
better.
I wish I had access to a tube preamp in the $3000-4000 range, which,
hopefully, would provide some idea how the Mingda ranks, but I don’t.
Unfortunately, I do not think most preamps up to about $2000 are going
to be of much help. I listened to a Classe 47.5 preamp, which sold new for
$2200, and found it of negligible assistance. Its midrange just does not
have the realism of either tube preamp’s midrange to start with, as great
as it sounds otherwise.
I also do not have access to a stock Mingda with which to make a
comparison of how much the modifications improve it. Nor can I say what
portion of the improvements can be attributed to the parts upgrades and
what to the cryo-treatment.
I am left saying that, within my experience, this is a remarkably good
sounding preamplifier. Period.
Kent Johnson
May 5, 2008
Associated equipment
PS My understanding is that if this modified preamplifier does get offered
for sale—and that appears to be a distinct possibility—it will be targeted
somewhere around the $800 price point. I have also been promised a
production example, which may have some additional changes. If and when
that happens, I will do a follow-up to this article.
*My RCA Receiving Tube Manual says this is the equivalent of a 5R4GB,
which is an industrial full-wave rectifier.
**Nothing says “good writing” like precise, technical descriptions.
***Evidently the name was always intended to be Audio Experience, not
Audio Experiment. Considering it could have ended up an Audio Expiration
or Audio Expectorant, Experiment does not seem so bad. Clearly, the
people at YS Audio, who make this equipment, are going to have to find a
US distributor and start offering a repair facility at some point soon. If
they don’t, there is no way they are going to be able to compete with all
the other Chinese equipment coming in.
Speaking purely for myself, I would love to see what YS-Audio could do
with a tube preamp selling for around $1200-1500. I would think that it
could be an incredible sounding piece of equipment. At the same time, I
would not spend that much money without having an in-home audition and
a US-based repair facility. What is tolerable in a $450 preamp is not in
something three times the price.
The Mingda MC-7R is a Chinese-made, distinctively styled, tube stereo line-
stage preamplifier. This modified example of the MC-7R was offered to me
a by a friend of the web site who thought I would find it interesting to
listen to. He was absolutely right.
It is the first Mingda product that I have heard, but given the amount of
equipment they make, it probably will not be the last.
I did some web surfing and found that the MC-7R has a list price of $599;
I found it readily available for $499. I was surprised to be honest; I would
have guess that it was more expensive given the apparent quality of its
construction.
DESCRIPTION
The Mingda MC-7R is an impressive piece of equipment. Immediately
obvious is the massive crackle-finished transformer cover with the Mingda
logo. Stainless steel wraps around the chassis itself, ala DeLorean; the
black front and rear fascia are 8mm thick. The MC-7R feels very dense and
weighs about 21 pounds. I measured the length at about 15 inches, the
width at just under 9 inches, and the height at 8.5 inches, thanks to its tall
rectifier tube. Click here for a photo.
The front of the preamp has the on/off switch, volume control, and source
selector switch. On the right side of the unit (facing it) and at the front are
the four pairs of input jacks. This might seem like an odd place to locate
the inputs but it actually makes a lot of sense. The inputs connect right at
the selector switch. The signal does not have to travel from the rear to the
front of the unit and potentially pick up noise in the process. The trade-off
is that longer interconnects are needed. Click here for a photo.
On the rear of the unit are two sets of output jacks (pretty much standard
equipment any more) and an IEC AC connection. While one of the source
inputs is labeled “Tape,” there are no record-out jacks. The input and
output jacks look to be of good quality. The tube sockets appear to be
ceramic. The volume control has a quality feel. The only things that seem
cost-accounted are the feet, which look like metal but are molded plastic.
The tube complement consists of a 12AX7 and 12AU7 tube per channel.
The Mingda most distinctive feature is the large Chinese-made 274B*
rectifier tube located in the center of the unit, just in front of the
transformer cover. The styling is definitely unique, whatever you might
think of its aesthetics.
MODIFICATIONS
I used this Mingda while listening to the Quad 21L2 speakers. In that
article, I stated that the Mingda was heavily modified. Well, as Bill Clinton
might say, “define heavily modified.” Here is what I understand to have
been done: The input and output coupling capacitors have been replaced
by AuriCaps. The rest of the caps have been bypassed using Sonic Craft
capacitors. The Mingda has also been cryo-treated—taken down to about
-300° Fahrenheit and then brought back to ambient temperature. You
decide how modified that makes it.
I did not open the unit up. I feared that if I checked out the inside of the
unit, it might prejudice me in some way. It is hard enough to avoid forming
some sort of initial opinion based on the external appearance of a
component.
SET UP
The Mingda started out in my living room system. It was immediately
obvious that it was far quieter through the VTL and Quads than my old
Audio Experiment preamp.
The Mingda had been on for a several hours. I was switching CDs right in
front of it when I detected an odd noise. It was sort of a rattling sound,
like little-bitty** metal pieces hitting each other. It took me a minute to
locate the sound—it was coming from the rectifier tube. I could hear it
from as far as three feet away if I concentrated on it but not at my listening
seat.
The next day, before I turned the Mingda on, I took one of the silicone
damping rings from a 6L6 in the VTL amp and applied it to the bump on
the top of the 274B rectifier tube. It fit perfectly. The rattling noise was
still there but was now only audible up to about a foot away. I left the
damper on for all of my listening. Having the damper on or off did not
change the sound of the preamp in any way that I could detect. Other
than the rectifier tube, the Mingda was silent mechanically and through
both my systems. It worked perfectly the whole time that I had it.
Click here for a photo.
I did my initial listening to the MC-7R with the stock Chinese tubes supplied
with the preamp. The soundstage was very open, well detached from the
Quads, with clean treble, tight bass, and excellent depth. Vocals were very
well centered. Everything sounded very good but I did notice a slight
flatness to Diana Krall’s voice that made her sound somewhat less realistic
than usual. I substituted some used Westinghouse 12AX7s and Ei 12AU7s
for the Chinese tubes just to see how they sounded. They eliminated this
relatively slight deficiency. I used these tubes only while the preamp was in
the living room system.
The Mingda provided a lot of enjoyment in my living room and was very
helpful getting a grip on the sound of the Quad speakers. To really hear
what the Mingda could do, though, I had to get it into my main system.
SERIOUS LISTENING
I was in Chicago in early April and I picked up a Shunyata Venom AC cord
at Music Direct while I was there. This cord is now being used on the Audio
Experience +R preamp in my main system so it was used with the Mingda
as well.
I spent a couple of days listening to my main system just to recalibrate my
ears after so much time spent with the living room system. As good as the
living room system has become, the main system still offers noticeably
more detail, subtlety, bass, and soundstage size.
I recently put new Electro Harmonix 12AX7 tubes in the Audio Experience
+R preamp (hereafter referred to as the AE) and it is sounding very good.
I received a pair of EH 12AU7s with the Mingda so I installed these along
with two new 12AX7s of my own for my comparison listening. I felt that
listening to both preamps with virtually new EH tubes would help them
sound their best and I would be listening for differences between the
preamps and not the tubes. I did switch the EH 12AX7s between the two
preamps while doing my listening and heard no difference as a result. I
tried some other 12AX7s as well and, frankly, neither preamp seems
particularly sensitive to the tubes it is running. Some really high end NOS
tubes might improve the sound of either preamp but they certainly are not
necessary to get excellent sound from either.
A FEW WORDS ABOUT THE AUDIO EXPERIENCE +R PREAMP
This preamp has been my reference since November 2006. I think it is very
good sounding despite being a relatively inexpensive, simple preamp. It
images incredibly well and has excellent top to bottom continuity.
I intended to write an article on it but have never gotten it done. Shortly
after getting the AE broken-in, in late 2006, my Rogue Stereo 90 amplifier
failed and had to be rebuilt. When the Rogue returned, it had to be
broken-in. Then there were power cord changes, tube changes, and RCA
plugs that I was listening to. When I finally got back to the AE in the fall of
2007, its power supply capacitors failed and I had to replace them. When
that was done, the AE sounded better than ever but could no longer be
considered a stock component. I also had nothing with which to compare it
at this point. The AE was clearly much better than the seven year old
Audio Experiment*** preamp it replaced so writing about how much better
the AE was seemed fairly pointless. As the AE has been my reference,
however, discussing its sound is unavoidable while discussing the sound of
the Mingda.
Externally the AE preamp is nicely finished, if not quite to the level of the
Mingda. Internally, the AE offers remote volume control and remote input
switching, which the Mingda does not. The AE also has a balance control,
which I never use but feel more comfortable having. The AE uses a 6X4
rectifier tube and three 12AX7s. The interior parts quality is very high.
The remote volume control is, if I understand it correctly, a resistor ladder
type. It inserts only one resistor in the signal path at any given time. This
may be incorrect on my part but is the best information that I can infer
from the AE website. www.ys-audio.com
LISTENING
I readjusted my ears to my main system by listening to variety of CDs—
acoustic, jazz, classical, and vocal.
I began my listening with the AE preamp in the system.
With this preamp, I get a very wide, deep, well-defined soundstage with
excellent low-level detail. On the Keith Jarrett CD, The Out-of-Towners
(ECM 1900), there is an extended drum solo on Track 3. During this solo
the drummer, Jack deJohnette, taps a solo cymbal with decreasing
loudness. I found myself sitting forward in my seat concentrating to hear
the cymbal as its sound got softer and softer. With the AE, I could hear all
the way down to the lowest level in the recording with no problem
whatsoever. The cymbal at that point is being played extremely softly. Yet
it is still obvious that it is a cymbal, and not some other metallic object
being struck, and its sound exists within a realistic acoustic environment.
Sometimes what I hear through my system surprises even me.
While discussing low-level information, I have heard differences between
tubes, RCA plugs, power cords, DACs, and digital cables readily through
the AE. Hearing these differences, in some cases, took some real work,
but the information was there to hear.
As far as bass and treble are concerned, the AE seems to reproduce
exactly what is on the recording. The bass in my system has always varied
from recording to recording. I think this is a good thing. Homogenized
one-note bass is not something I am looking for from my system, however
deep or loud that bass may be. I have recordings that sound bass-shy
and others where you want to turn the bass down. Fortunately, most
recordings fall within a less extreme range that sounds very good and very
solid. I get bass that can be felt as well as heard.
Treble reproduction is very clean. Cymbals sound metallic with a nice sheen
that, depending upon the recording, varies from good to extremely good.
The overtones on high-pitched instruments are reproduced very clearly.
There is no confusing an oboe with a clarinet or flute playing in their
highest registers. Violin sounds very good with no trace of shrillness.
Of course, with tubes, it is really all about the midrange. I have a great
many jazz CDs that feature female vocalists and I cannot think of one that
does not sound beautiful through my system. Different from each other—
absolutely—but still beautiful.
Male vocals sound very good also. Pavarotti, Jackson Browne, Johnny
Cash, Willie Nelson, John Mayer, and Frank Sinatra all sound very natural
and present in my room.
Overall, I think the AE sounds pretty darn good, not just for its price, but
in absolute terms.
So what happened when the modified Mingda went into my main system?
My system got better.
LISTENING TO THE MINGDA
I did not expect this. I expected that the modded Mingda MC-7R would
probably be close to the AE in sound quality but not better.
The sound of the two preamps is very very similar by just about any
criteria that you want to apply but the Mingda moves low-level details
through the system better. This additional detail results in both a more
realistic midrange and soundstage.
These are not huge differences but they are the kind of differences that
matter to me and I am sure to anyone reading this article.
I recently purchased Jackson Browne’s CD, solo acoustic vol. 2 (Inside
Recordings INR8021-9). I loved vol. 1 and vol. 2 is also very good. On
this CD, through the modified Mingda, I can hear the audience requests
and comments much more easily and clearly than I could with the AE.
Jackson talks about owning guitars on track 6. He refers to the number of
guitars owned by Steven Stills (some years ago) as “the most decadent
thing I had ever heard of.” When he finishes a voice in the audience says
rather sarcastically, “Look at the stage” referring to all of the guitars
Jackson has brought with him. This remark was not intelligible through the
AE but it was with the Mingda. The Mingda did not bring clarity to all the
comments on this CD, obviously, but did illuminate a number of them.
True, this is not music but, in my experience, it is usually in the non-
musical information that you first notice the differences between
components. Then you hear the differences in the music itself.
This ability to better hear low-level details carried over to most vocals that I
listened to. Female vocalists, in particular, sound more real through the
Mingda and the acoustic space around them seems to be better integrated
into the overall soundstage. Most systems, mine included, tend to break
the acoustic space into sections. There is the vocalist section; the bass
section, the drum section, and so forth. The Mingda better integrates
these sections into a single acoustic space. This improvement tends to
make the soundstage seem less precise initially but, with extended
listening, this proves not to be the case. The soundstage is still there, as
wide and deep as ever, just less fragmented.
On the Once soundtrack (Canvasback/Columbia/Sony 88697 10586 2),
both Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova sound more natural while the words
they sing are more intelligible. Where they sing together, it is easier to
follow them individually.
A CD that I am particularly fond of is Dena Derose’s A Walk in the Park
(Maxjazz MXJ502). It is wonderfully musical while offering reference quality
sound. Ms. Derose is not only a fine singer and pianist, she is a song
writer, composer, and arranger as well. She really should be better
known. Her voice and piano both sounded more natural through the
Mingda. The acoustic space around her was more atmospheric and open as
well.
I have six more pages of notes that I could go through, recording by
recording, further repeating what I am talking about. I do not think that is
necessary. The fact is that I heard the same sort of improvement through
the Mingda on virtually everything I listened to—Handel, Charles Lloyd, Holly
Cole, KD Lang, Benjamin Britten, or Gidon Kremer. Sure, it was easier to
hear on some recordings than others but it was there pretty much
everywhere. On the few recordings where I heard no improvement, the
Mingda was as good as the AE.
There has to be some sort of drawback to the Mingda’s sound, right?
Throughout my listening, I felt that the Mingda might emphasize sibilance
very slightly in comparison to the AE. I am still not sure whether this is
actually the case or whether it is a by-product of the improved detail. I am
inclined to believe the latter. In any case, it is not a distraction.
WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE THINGS?
Well, to begin with, it leaves me needing a better preamp.
I have struggled with the AE to determine where it competes in the overall
hierarchy of sound quality. And now I have heard something subtly
better.
I wish I had access to a tube preamp in the $3000-4000 range, which,
hopefully, would provide some idea how the Mingda ranks, but I don’t.
Unfortunately, I do not think most preamps up to about $2000 are going
to be of much help. I listened to a Classe 47.5 preamp, which sold new for
$2200, and found it of negligible assistance. Its midrange just does not
have the realism of either tube preamp’s midrange to start with, as great
as it sounds otherwise.
I also do not have access to a stock Mingda with which to make a
comparison of how much the modifications improve it. Nor can I say what
portion of the improvements can be attributed to the parts upgrades and
what to the cryo-treatment.
I am left saying that, within my experience, this is a remarkably good
sounding preamplifier. Period.
Kent Johnson
May 5, 2008
Associated equipment
PS My understanding is that if this modified preamplifier does get offered
for sale—and that appears to be a distinct possibility—it will be targeted
somewhere around the $800 price point. I have also been promised a
production example, which may have some additional changes. If and when
that happens, I will do a follow-up to this article.
*My RCA Receiving Tube Manual says this is the equivalent of a 5R4GB,
which is an industrial full-wave rectifier.
**Nothing says “good writing” like precise, technical descriptions.
***Evidently the name was always intended to be Audio Experience, not
Audio Experiment. Considering it could have ended up an Audio Expiration
or Audio Expectorant, Experiment does not seem so bad. Clearly, the
people at YS Audio, who make this equipment, are going to have to find a
US distributor and start offering a repair facility at some point soon. If
they don’t, there is no way they are going to be able to compete with all
the other Chinese equipment coming in.
Speaking purely for myself, I would love to see what YS-Audio could do
with a tube preamp selling for around $1200-1500. I would think that it
could be an incredible sounding piece of equipment. At the same time, I
would not spend that much money without having an in-home audition and
a US-based repair facility. What is tolerable in a $450 preamp is not in
something three times the price.