The year is 1980. Bob Carver had sold his interest in Phase Linear to Pioneer and had founded Carver Corporation. The company that was stamping out Phase Linear faceplates, did double duty and was now stamping out Carver faceplates.
His first product, an updated Phase Linear 4000 preamp, now called the Carver 4000 preamp, with the addition of the Sonic Hologram Generator as well as the Peak Unlimiter/Downward Expander and Auto Correlation noise reduction as seen in the Phase Linear 4000 and 4000 Series Two preamp.
The first amplifier was a reworking of the Phase Linear 400 Series Two amplifier, now called the Carver C-500 amplifier, boasting an additional 50watts per channel for 250 watts per side. Phase Linear fans loved the amp and preamp, but we also knew that Bob was working on a new technology that would be an energy efficient amplifier capable of more that 200 watts per channel in stereo mode and more than 500 watts per channel in mono. The kicker, the amp would be a light weight 7 inch cube featuring Carvers Magnetic Field Technology. Hmmm, we couldn’t wait to see it and hear it.
Back in these days I was a big fan of Phase Linear and had been waiting to see and hear this amp. My intention was always to buy a pair of them and strap them in Mono for 500 watts per channel which is what I did.
So how does the M-400 sound? Good actually, very good. It’s a clean amp with a nice midrange and good high end. The bass is strong, but not ultra deep like the Phase Linear 400 Series one amplifier. Honestly, having owned the Phase Linear 400, I found the Carvers to be a much more lean sounding amp. The Phase 400 has some color and just gobs of power and headroom.
When the M-400 ran out of juice, it did so quickly and usually resulted in it turning its self off, which I found very irritating as this happened often when driving my EPI 200 C’s or my BOSE 901 IV’s, which could easily handle 2000 wpc without strain. More about those in another post.
I used the M-400’s as my main amplifiers for about 10 years, occasionally replacing them with a Yamaha M-40 or the Phase Linear 400.
I have one really crummy photo of my system from 1981, a scratched up polaroid which I will replace with a decent shot once I find one. (I have to search family photos for that)
I did like the sound of the M-400 and I found that the later M-400a didn’t shut down as often when being pushed hard and that the M-400t was a much better sounding amplifier than the M-400 or the M-400a which basically sounded identical.
Our tastes change, our listening habits change, the things we listen for change as well. I didn’t realize it at the time, but Hi-Fi, isn’t all about volume. Listening enjoyment isn’t all about sterile accuracy, which is a good way to describe the M-400. I also found out that some distortions, actually make music sound better and more natural. (Harmonic distortion for example).
I replaced the entire Phase Linear/Carver system with a McIntosh C-29, and MC-2300 which was just life changing sonically. The Mac system brought me closer to what I was missing and the MC-2300 was without question more powerful and superior sounding than the M-400’s could ever wish to be. The enormous 129 lbs Mac amp just had effortless power and could drive a half ohm load which is nearly a direct short, putting out more than 2000 wpc in the process. The Mac also had realistic sounding bass, deep bass, extremely deep bass and a very natural midrange. The highs were all their and crystal clear without any edginess. More on the MC-2300 coming soon in another post.
Carver had a saying about being “Powerful, Musical and Accurate.” There was a time that I truly believed that. I agree with the “Powerful, and Accurate”, but today I wouldn’t say they are “Musical”.
For example, The M-400 is powerful, it can put out 500 wpc into 8ohms as a mono block, which is how I used them. However, they choke when asked for sustained high volume listening periods. I honestly don’t feel that the amp can put out 50 wpc for sustained amount of time without shutting down. If you’re listed to hard rock, or classic rock then the amp is going to heat up and shut down. If you’re listening to Jazz or classical then the Carver is good to go for extended high volume listening periods without issue. It’s when the music gets complex that the amp throws a fit.
After my listening tastes began to change, I found the Carvers just unacceptable. Not to offend any Carver fans, I am still a huge fan of Bob Carver, but even Bob’s tastes changed as time went on as seen in his amplifier designs. Before he retired, he was building some of the highest powered, best sounding tube amplifiers in the world.
I found that I could hear more detail, expression, depth, tone and texture when I replaced the Phase/Carver system with the Mac. Then I found that I could get more nuance, touch, texture, sparkle, and emotion, when I replaced the Big Mac system with a tiny Sansui 551 receiver.
That was the biggest eye opener in my 50 year Hi-Fi journey. To this day, the Sansui 4000 with 45 wpc will blow the Carver M-400 and the Mac system into the weeds with its lush sonic signature. It’s just hypnotic to listen too.
For a time in my life, Bob Carver’s amp’s and preamps ruled. But when it came time to forget about the gear and the spl and just listen to the music, they couldn’t compete.
I do recommend the Carver M-400, it’s powerful, good sounding, utterly reliable, but to me they are clinical and sterile, when compared to almost any Pioneer, or Sansui built prior to 1977, which means as your tastes mature you will find their is much more to the story. I sold my Carvers to a collector in California who is still using the pair to this day.
More to come!
No comments:
Post a Comment