mcc

Overall Rating
 5 of 5

Value Rating
 5 of 5

Used product for
More than 1 year

Visitors rate this review
3.67 of 5, 3.00 votes

Price Paid:  $0.00 from Inherited from my da

Summary:
I've been using the Quad 44/405-II combo for over 6 years, in addition to the years that my dad's been using it. Recently I found a shop selling an Audio Research LS2, LS3B, LS7, and LS9, each going for $700+ dollars. Given that my dad's present system uses an AR SP-5, I thought that it was time to upgrade my system. I did a lot of research on the internet, and was convinced that any of the AR preamps would completely outdo my Quad 44. The audio shop with the ARs hooked each of the preamps to an Aragon 4004 and QEF speakers. My dad and I were not impressed with the sound produced by any of the setups. For comparison, I hooked up my old Quad 44, and to my immense surprise, the music came alive! Both my dad and the salesman agreed that Quad 44 sounded a LOT better than all the venerable Audio Research preamplifiers (It's also a whole lot cheaper). We ended up purchasing the Aragon 4004. The 405-II is a great power-amp, but realistically, the Aragon 4004 is just in a completely different league.

Strengths:
Completely unfatiguing, neutral, sound.

Weaknesses:
After hearing what Audio Reseach had to offer, absolutely none!

Similar Products Used:
Yamaha, Audio Research, Denon amplifiers/pre-amplifiers

Price Paid:  $150.00 from Gone out of business

Summary:
Originally, I bought this unit as part of a package, which included a Quad 405 power amp - it was supposed to be an upgrade over a large Rotel integrated amp. I was well pleased ... this combination gave me a fuller sound than I had experienced before. Seemingly more not so much more transparent but greater tonal accuracy, and certianly much less fatiguing (read "irritating"!) when listening to more shrill sounds, such as flute, piano or female voice, which seemed much more natural with this combination. I later upgraded to a second 405 and had Quad do all the necessary work for me - the 44 with a mono pair of 405s. Wow! Big upgrade in sound. Fuller sound, more 3-D and better dynamics. However, while the 44 was away being worked on I fixed up the old Rotel integrated's pre-amp section to the Quad 405s ... I was in for a big surprise. Not much difference when I played tape or CD but records ... The Rotel phono section was much the superior to the Quad 44, such that I could now hear a SIGNIFICANT bettering of sound quality with vinyl over CD. I subsequently bought an Eico ST70 integrated tune amp, a much older beastie than the Quad ... have to say its phono section bettered the Quad 44, too.

Strengths:
Fantastic built, like it would withstand a direct hit from a Minute Man Missile! Fabulous tone controls (very useful for playing 78s and badly recorded anything else, too.)

Weaknesses:
DIP switches eventually disintegrate with age and need replacing. The DIN plugs are a bit of a bind! Phono section lets down this otherwise great little pre-amp. It's the poor phono section thatm for me, drags this product down to a 3 star overall.

Similar Products Used:
Rotel integrated ??? Trevor Lees TL1 tube pre-amp, Eico ST70 tube pre-amp.

Price Paid:  $189.00 from ebay

Summary:
I've read tons of criticalmaterial about this pre. The only thing that the critics made me want to do is to try it out. I have used a Quad 33 pre for about 20 years. I have listend to many kits set up by friends but just about always want to get home to my own kit. Last night i took posesion of a Quad 44 pre. Hooked it up and let me tell you - i thought that there was something wrong with my speakers. My first impression was, where are all of those instruments coming from in what I thought was a familiar piece of Latin music? Wow, let me tell you. I've got the 44 hooked to two 303s which in turn are driving two Kef65.2s. Now I know what soundstage really means!! True, as others say, the Quad pre is not as detailed as some preamps but I'd have to spend ten times the money I paid for the Quad to get more detail. I find that the bass is greta for me, a classical, blues & jazz lover. There is more than enough bass for the Stone's Stripped album and for the Greatful Workingman's Dead & Bob Marley & The Wailers. Sure, what passes for "bass" & "treble" controls on the 44 are going to take some getting used to but in my view, thy seem to work better than traditional controls. I agree with the previous reviwer who said that this pre is neutral. My living room sounds like a damn good concert hall not like the sound room in my local hi-fi shop. I just love it that I can have such sound at the same price point at which many people buy absolute garbage.

Strengths:
Soundstage! Way enough detail for me. Fabulous on a wide array of music. Classy looks. A must buy at current prices & holds value

Weaknesses:
None yet

Similar Products Used:
Quad 33

Price Paid:  $200.00

Summary:
This is an interesting and very original preamp. It is totally modular, with the possibility of finetuning the phono input quite well to your cartridge, and very, very well built, so it was an interesting choice for sound professionals. The look of the device may surprise you, it is actually quite small (Quad never made big boxes), and depending on the year finished in beige or or military kind of grey. It also has a very original tone control, which works totally unlike classic tone controls. It is a combination of a "tilt" circuit and filters. Now, for 95% of the time I play "flat" but for some bad sounding CD''s this tone control actually brings more music, and it works a lot better than classic bass and treble. I have this 2nd hand pream since something like 5 years, and I am still very happy with it. It is connected to a Quad 405-II amp and JBL speakers. As all quad electronics, the sound is soft and neutral, but not extremely detailed. I can believe that there are more transparant amps on the market (for example: changing CD players barely influences output sound), but you won''t mind; the thing just keeps on reproducing music in an unfatigueing way. The kind of device that made me lose interest in hi-end audio. I would have to pay a LOT to get a serious improvement in sound quality.

Strengths:
- soft, neutral, totally without listening fatigue. - extremely well built modular design, reputation of excellent reliability. - unique, clever tone controls can come in handy from time to time.

Weaknesses:
- not the most transparant preamp on the market - wayward design not for everybody - as always with quad: unassuming looks will not impress the friends!

Similar Products Used:
I had a Harman Kardon integrated amp. Nice, but the quad combination is definitely softer sounding.

Summary:
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.

Strengths:
Build and Parts quality, Musicality

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

Similar Products Used:
Quad 33, Adcom GFP-555-II, NAD 1300