About 6 years ago, when my old receiver was giving trouble, I decided to upgrade. At the time, I still was using my old Kef 104aB speakers,which I had bought in 1976. My ultimate goal was to get the Quad ESL-63s sometime, so I wanted something that would drive them, or somethingmore affordable like the excellient Paradigm Studio Monitors, both of which are basically 4 ohm speakers.
Fredericton is a smallish provincial capital, but I have travelled enough to have been able to try out quite a number of products. We do not have the variety that one can find in Chicago, Montreal, Toronto, Halifax, and other larger centres. However, the Magic Forest Music Store carries many of the same products that the better stores in larger cities do: Bryston, Arcam, Quad, Nakamichi, with Rotel for a more budget audiophile brand, and Yamaha for very good more mass consumer products. They also have a couple of the best audio and video consultants you can find anywhere.

On my travels, I have found that Bryston and Quad sound about as good as you can get, though I have never tried the superexpensive stuff. I have auditioned much expensive electronics at 2 to 4 times the price such as Krell and Conrad Johnson, and also some closer to my desired price range such as Classé and Forté. The Brystons and Quads seem to me as good as any of them.

Locally, my short list came down to Bryston and Quad I was interested in the Bryston 1B preamplifier and 3B-NRT amplifier, and the Quad 34 or 44 preamplifier and Quad 606 amplifier.

My listening tastes are mostly classical. I used recordings of full orchestra, chorus, piano, organ and some folk and pop (like Angèle Arsenault), and a Three Blind Mice Jazz Sampler. I have a wonderful brass recording which sounds rather different on different amplifiers, a Nimbus CD, Gabrieli & St. Mark's, with the British Wallace Collection, directed by trumpeter John Wallace. For the most part, the Bryston and the Quad sounded very much alike at ordinary levels.

The Quad combination had the advantage on the brass recording. With the Quad electronics, I could hear every little vibration in the whole Wallace Collection ensemble. This tonal detail is maintained at very low levels as well, something very few amplifiers seem to be able to do, although some of the really expensive products seem to begin to do so.

As far as I can tell, the Quad 44 preamplifier is quite neutral. The dealer remarked that some people like an amplifier a little more forward, or a little more distant. I like neutral, as I do not want to hear the amplifier, but the music. Some reviewers have remarked, perhaps with a slight disdain, that the Quad electronics are for music lovers rather than audiophiles. Well, that is the point, is it not?

The controls on the Quad preamplifiers are unique. Instead of bass and treble controls, which seldom do anything to improve the sound, the Quads have their "tilt" control, which tilts the frequency response up or down throughout the whole midrange and upper midrange, with a shelved response above and below that. This is very useful with a number of recordings which are too dull or too bright, without sounding obtrusive.

The bass boost and cut are not symmetrical, since they have different purposes. The boost is meant counterract the bass roll-off in small speakersk, while the bass cut is meant to counteract boomy bass from room resonances. If you have accurate full range speakers, you probably will not use this control very much.

The high filter system on the Quad 44 is very elaborate. One can choose the turnover point and the slope of the filter. This can be very useful with noisy LP recordings, as one can find a point which will cut down the noise and hiss without effecting the music very much.

The Quad 44 has a very good phono preamplifier. It is very quiet, even if the preamplifier is set on top of a Quad amplifier, they are so well shielded. There are settings for cartridges of different output levels and input characteristics, which is very unusual.

Compared to the Quad 34, the Quad 44 has an extra tape input and a more elaborate high filter. The Quad 44's tape inputs have a fairly high input impedance, 100 Kilohms, while the CD and Radio 500,000 and 1,000,000 ohms, respectively, according to the owner's manual. One should be able to hook up a wide variety of equipment to it. Certainly, the output electronics of a CD player will be loafing. The Quad 44 also has three pairs of outputs with different levels of output. So, one should be able to hook it up to almost any amplifier.

The Bryston electronics have a 20 year guarantee and fast service were very attractive. However, Quad has a reputation for reliability, as well, so other factors prevailed. To my ears, the Quads sounded slightly better, though not everyone agrees. The Quad electronics are very neutral with the tone controls flat. The tone controls themselves are unique and effective, three output levels. It is a very versatile preamplifier. I also like the unusual styling, which makes them something of a conversation piece. A few months later, I was able to buy a used pair of Quad ESL-63s at Magic Forest, which certainly are conversation pieces, and the Quad electronics work wonderfully well with them.

I tried the Quad electronics as a package, so I cannot speak of the preamplifier separately. Practicality has some limits; one can spend too much time trying out different combinations, you know. My Quad 44 has simply worked well and it and the Quad 606 amplifier sounded great with my old Kef 104aBs (someone is still using them), the older Paradigm Studio Monitors in the store, and the the ESL-63s. There are those of us who want a system which does not call attention to itself, which just lets us listen to the music. The Quad electronics help. I have nothing against a number of other fine preamps, but to me the Quad electronics are first rate, so I give it 5 stars.

Build and Parts quality, Musicality

Connectors (A few are still DIN !), odd size

1. Features : unusual, but fine. Interesting tone controls.
You can fine-tune the phono MM input : pF and sensitivity.
2. Buid Quality : Awesome !!! Very high quality components, perfect internal organization, shielding, cabling, soldering. It is totally modular (each input has its own card, and you can easily change them).
3. Sound : very, very good, but difficult to describe. Compared to others, it is NOT the most detailed, it is NOT the deepest in the bass, it is NOT the quietest ... but it IS one of the best - if not THE best - I listened to.
Neutral, musical, excellent compromise details/softness, etc.
I bought it in Bruxelles (I am Belgian) around 1982 for around $750.
3 years ago, I made a stupid mistake : I sold it for a small amount (to an Indian - smart - engineer) because I was tired of having to use RCA-DIN cables, and I thought it was outdated.

Similar Products Used:

Quad 33, Adcom GFP-555-II, NAD 1300

Wonderful separation of individual voices and instruments, most notably in multi-track recordings

At the price? None

Overall rating:

Use it with a Quad power amp. It's utterly neutral, with the possible exception of deepest bass, that seems to be on the light side. This might be due to the use of mediocre op-amps in the signal path. Slight lack of depth in soundstage only apparent when compared to pre-amps twice to ten times the cost. Cuddly styling.

The full story:

Having owned several different set-ups, looking for the right fit with my own subjective hi-end expectancies, I am now happily employing a Quad 44/606 combination, being fed Denon DL-110 on SME on customized Thorens 160 MKII, Denon DCD 1500-II, digitally paired to a Sony ES 57B DAT recorder/DA Conv., driving a pair of ancient JBL L-150's.

Let me first explain, that for the past three years I've had the extreme privilege to have been listening to a handcrafted "Enigma OTL" amplifier. It's an output transformerless triode valve design, consisting of a power supply, pre-amp and dual mono amps. Every piece of hand and ear selected circuitry is hard wired, using solid core 99.9%+ pure silver. It only suffers the minimal internal feedback, that occurs naturally at the phase shifter in the pre-gain stage.

The Amp sells at around $ 60,000 I believe, so I could never ever afford it, but I just happen to know the circuit designer, Rob Kruize, a reclusive genius in valve design. He allowed the amp to stay at my residence for "endurance testing". Not a bad deal, although you don't want to know what these 2000 Watt a piece power drenchers did to my electrical bill!

To make a long story short. The Enigma OTL represents all the etheric qualities audiophiles and most music lovers crave for. The music comes ALIVE. Partnered with straightforward transducers like the 80's JBL juggernauts they show a remarkable soundstage and unprecedented ease of delivery of all frequencies present in modern day recordings. At 60 Watts per channel they're sufficiently powerful and refined to deliver visceral punch and incredibly subtle spatial information at the same time, never losing track of rythm nor pace. The soundstage projected is only limited by the recording itself. In all, I was spoiled.

When the Enigma's moved on to "a better place" (a listening studio in my hometown of Vlaardingen) I was forced to make due for some time with an old receiver of a well known Japanese producer, still in my posession. I was nowhere in terms of having saved up enough capital to compensate the loss.

It was then, that I truly started to appreciate the powwer of true high fidelity. I had forgotten altogether how harsh and two dimensional a cheap solid state amp could sound. Then the following happened. Whilst paying a visit to my local high end dealer, whom I consider a good friend by now as well, I stumbled upon a FM4/44/606 Quad set that he had just traded in from a customer. I told Cor (that's what he's called) that I was intrigued and wouldn't mind having the set hooked up to my sources and speakers at home, to finally get some first hand experience in why Quad seems to have such an ardent following.

The gear was installed and I was not impressed. No Bass, and , again,just two dimensions. I then changed interlinks from (what was I thinking?!) standard low quality copper to a few pairs of hand made twisted silver and magic happened. A few more attempts with Oehlbach and vandenHul, and I felt "home" again!

The 44 has wonderfull features to make pairing with different sources and power amps easy. It offers different input sensibilities, a very neutral Phono Pre-Stage and three different output voltages. For the 606 I chose the 500 mV output, for ease of use at low listening levels.

The massive feedback loop that defines the 606 sound, makes for total control. There's little freedom of movement, but boy, the "current dumping" of this design seems to be directed more at the loudspeakers than what the term originally referred to! This small amp rocks, big time. Another thing is, the cleanliness and lack of harshness in the midrange. The 44/606 has to grow on you a bit, but once it has, you are suddenly accutely aware of that what you're listening to comes frightfully close to a recording studio monitoring session. I should know, as I am a recording artist myself.

I bought the set.

Liveliness is not the term to immediately spring to mind, but accuracy most surely is. At the $900 I payed for it, I haven't yet heard anything that comes close. I've tried Duson/Audioanalyse, Musical fidelity, Vincent and the likes. I didn't try Bryston yet, which I'm sure is quite beautiful.

When compared to valve designs, the 44/606 combo definitely lacks a bit of space and air, but makes up with enough slam to make most people happy, with the exception of Krell owners. You won't find a Krell at the price, 'though....

For its (unused, in my case) tonal control, the 44 deserves special recommendation

Similar Products Used:

At the price? None, again!