What's Going on here?

Hi

As I alluded to in my first thread, I recently bought a used MF amp on eBay. RRRP was over £800 though I didn't pay that of course. I realise auditions are better but I'm on a strict budget.


Anyway, to cut a long story short, I was somewhat perplexed to find that, on arrival, the MF was easily outclassed by a humble Stan Curtis designed Cambridge P40 from the late 80s. This budget integrated cost me about £180 back in the day.


Now, even allowing for inflation, these two amps should clearly be in different leagues, so what's going on? I've been away from the hi-fi scene for awhile, have standards fallen? was 80s budget stuff particularly good?


Any ideas?



Thanks, LS

 

what amp have you bought, what other kit are you using?

 

Hi

The amp was supposed to be part of a general upgrade, so my system is part old, part new.


I bunged a cheapo phono box into the MF just as a stop gap for vinyl replay - I realise this will be holding back analogue performance, but the Cambridge does much better with my CD player too.

The MF is an X-150

 

yes - I have limited experience with MF - I owned a x-80 for about a week - I was hoping that it would be better than my humble nad c350 given it was almost twice the price RRP...but it wasn't and I bought a nad power amp instead..!

have you let the amp warm up a bit before you play it - that does generally help, I leave my kit of 24/7...

 

Yes, I've been leaving it switched on to try it. After about an hour and a half of actual use its performance improves markedly, but still falls short of the P40, which is much more involving.

 

I'm afraid this does not surprise me in the least. Hopefully you should be able to get most of your money back.

 

thechoice of what's better is up to the indidual,i had more hi-fi trough my life that begs belief, some of the m.f. gear was and is very good, they started a revolution to make foreing made and laim home made amps and made them observe that high cost or tone controls were not necessary when they launched the "A1"class A, HAVING SAID THAT THE x-150 To me is a very poor sounding amp,i thought that the first a-x1 was superve, also a gret classic the A1000, INT. but there are vintage 70's amps like LUXMAN, JVC, ETC that still would give a run for the money to now adays equip.
regards nando. (ima)

 

Well I guess there is some kind of consolation in knowing that others have heard this amp and weren't overly impressed with it either – it supposedly won 'The European Amplifier of the Year' award or something. I wondered if it might be me having one of my funny turns.

Also, I half expected to get a response similar to what the 80s hi-fi mags I used to read would have written in their help pages, explaining to me that the quality of the MF was exposing the poverty of my sources/speakers, followed by a long list of very expensive upgrades that I had to make IMMEDIATELY.


LS

 

i can assure you the X-A150, is not "in my ears" a very pleasent amp to enjoy music with, that does not mean that others that they make are of the same carecter, the new X-T100, is by no means the same, it is a superve amp, take heed about expesive routs to take, always try things on sale or return, never go by reviews, ther may be dealers charges and conditions that they may have within reason,
regards nando.

 

In a sentence, ''put it back on ebay".

Here's a good integrated, would be very suprised if you didn't rate it -

they have a big, quality Rotel integrated here:

http://www.technosound.co.uk/nav.php?pageid=offers

It's second hand for about£150. For some reason it's not on the website (?), but I saw it there yesterday.

It had an RRP of something like £800-£1000, and is a LOT of amp for the money.

I can't find details on google I'm afraid but I'd definately reccomend giving them a call.

 

Thanks for the link, Bottleneck. I might check that out.


I guess if it wasn't for the fact that the P40 goes crackly and loses volume in 1 channel oocasionally, I'd hang on to it for the time being as it sounds so good. Then I'd be able to concentrate on the dream turntable I've always wanted.


I'm a little suspicious of amp 'upgrades' given my experience with the MF.


LS

 

The X-80 and -150 were not among MF's success stories, I believe.

Remarkably soon after their release, dealers were selling them at knock down prices - looked as if they couldn't give them away.

Best to move it on, I think.

 

Are you talking about the Cambridge Audio P40 which came out in the early 70's (not late 80's) or another, later model? If it's an original P40, then it's a very fine amp. The crackly volume control is one of the downsides.

 

It doesn't surprise me either. I had a Primare for a short while. Very well reviewed at about £1500 only to hear it absolutely trashed in the music stakes by my Nait 2. The Primare was incredibly dull.

Steve

 

Mine is the 80s model...not sure when it first surfaced but I bought mine new in the late 80s for £180. It was in the budget integrated class along with the Cyrus One and the Arcam Alpha 2. I auditioned all 3 at the time and thought the P40 well ahead, although the Cyrus was the one getting all the attention in the Hi-fi press. Nowadays it crackles when you adjust the controls and a channel occasionally cuts out, but when its working I'm still pretty impressed by its performance. I'm wondering if a repair might be the best alternative, as judging by my MF experience, I will have to spend serious money to achieve a noticable improvement.


Hi Steve. Yes, before I bought the MF I checked and found many rave reviews. Hi-fi Choice declared the X80/150 the best integrateds under £1000.


I dunno, maybe it's just a system mismatch. I have some old Linn Index 2 speakers as well as the Cyrus. I've not been using them as I find them too bright with the P40, but they did improve the MF's performance.

 

You may be able to fix crackly volume and control pots with Caig Deoxit – just a quick squirt.

 

In the MF's defence, I have heard the X-150 sound very entertaining indeed with a pair of (admittedly expensive) Audio Physic Virgo IIIs. I also believe the X-150 sold pretty well, but the X-80 had to have it's prices slashed as nobody bought it for the relatively tacky volume knob and low power for only £200 less than the X-150 list price. Thus the £220 X-80s going on ebay for a couple of months.

I prefer the old lozenge boxes though! One thing you might consider is that perhaps musical fidelity simply isn't for you. Try a Naim Nait 5i if you want an entertaining contrast. Again, buy right and you'll lose nothing trying.

 

Hi Furyous

I had tried an X-80 before I bought the 150 and thought that that sounded good, which is why I have been somewhat disappointed in the 150. As far as I can tell, they’re more or less the same amp, except the 80 is slightly less powerful and, as you say, the volume knob is just traditionally plain and not as fancy as the 150.

To be honest though, I’ve been doing some serious A/bing over the weekend, I’ve also borrowed some better interconnects, and I have to admit that the sound of the MF has grown on me somewhat. The P40 has some pleasant euphony in the high registers which I like, but I’ve noticed that it adds it to EVERY record, so I’m beginning to think it’s just colouration and that the MF is being more truthful.

I think I’ll hold fire for a while: the main problem might be just that I’ve been listening to the P40 for 20 years and have grown accustomed to its foibles. The more I listen to MF the more that I seem to like it, so I don’t want to rush into selling it and then regretting it later.


Thanks everyone for your help.

LS