M-1.0t Mk II road show amplifier

Amplifier Reviews
Post Reply
RichP714
SILVER-7t
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:12 pm

M-1.0t Mk II road show amplifier

Post by RichP714 » Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:17 pm

A place for people to post their experiences with this amp and share information. What speakers did you run her on, etc.....

RichP714
SILVER-7t
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:12 pm

Re: M-1.0t Mk II road show amplifier

Post by RichP714 » Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:19 pm

Audiophile101's comments:


Review of the Carver M-1.0t MKII (RichP714 Modified):

Sometimes starting a review can be difficult but this time it will be easy. I want to simply begin by once again thanking Rich for allowing me and a few choice others to have the chance to demo this amplifier. It is an incredibly nice thing for him to do and I appreciate it very much.

When the Carver M-1.0t MKII arrived I was very excited. Later on that night I took the time to set it up and started my first listening session. For reference, I was using a Carver M-1.5t that was just rebuilt and in top working order before I swapped the M1.0t MKII in it's place. Joined with a C-19 and some Yamaha NS-1000's I got busy. It was already late so I grabbed a few cd's that I know very well and started things up. I played a few classic rock cd's such as Yes, Rush, and Pink Floyd. I noticed major improvements in comparison to the M-1.5t in most every way possible and immediately! The bass was incredibly tighter and definitely more extended. The midrange were warmer and slightly more natural sounding. The treble was very direct and crisp with great frequency extension. When a cymbal was struck hard you heard it with near the same violence the as when it was recorded (or so you would think). The musical separation was great as well. Every instrument was well defined and played very enjoyably. Vocals seemed very nice as well but I won't say that they are the M-1.0t MKII's strong point. A very few number of times I felt the male vocals seemed ever so slightly dull. The only thing I didn't like at first listen was the soundstage. With my M-1.5t, I could sit back and point around to the different instruments playing and the vocals on most cd's were dead centered. The M-1.5t soundstage was very 3D and perhaps the best thing I liked about it. The MKII was lacking this, but not by a large margin. I could still sit and point but it seemed to be a bit on the shallow side, lacking the proper depth. I played with my speakers a bit and got it better but I could not get it quite as good as my M-1.5t. Don't get me wrong, it was still an impressive dynamic soundstage, it was simply one up'd in that department. Another thing that I liked so much is how it was so direct and in your face like many higher end solid state amplifiers, but it had that warmth about it that allowed higher listening levels without fatigue. I would say "tube like" but I honestly feel that tube amplifiers are in a league of their own sonically.... Ok!!! It was "tube like" in a way. Yes, I gathered all that the first night (ok, maybe two).

From that day on I had a whole bunch of listening time and enjoyed whole slew of cd's and even some records (many half speed mastered and direct to disc). I was actually trying to be picky and find things I didn't like and it was tough. This amplifier is just simply enjoyable! One thing I noticed was how black the background was. Even on some recordings that had a bit of ugly background noise, they seemed to lay lower. To sum it all up, I think overall that the M-1.0t MKII is one of the best sounding solid state amplifier I have heard. I've heard amplifiers that were more natural sounding, and as stated above, have better soundstages and dynamics but this was by far the most enjoyable solid state amplifier I have used. From day one my thoughts didn't change much on this amplifier. It stood out and told me it's story right away. Usually over time I tend to sort out the pro's and cons of the overall sound but my original thoughts stuck with me for the entire duration I used it. I won't even talk about power output because we all know it's a monster! It was right up there with my M-1.5t and that thing is a powerhouse! This is the best amplifier for the money I have used. I believe they are somewhere around $650, and to me thats a bargain.

Hope you enjoyed this review. I tried to make it detailed but we all know there are only so many words we can use to describe what we hear.

Also, a quick review of Rich's S.T.D. (sonic transmography dongle):

The STD dongle thingy hurt performance in every way in my system. The bass was muddier (most noticable), the musical seperation were hurt and the tip of the treble was even lacking in some songs. The power output was hurt as well. I had to turn it up higher for the same level of sound. The already warm sounding amplifier was no more warm. I used it for a short period before dissconnecting it. I don't mean to sound direct and blunt about it but I'm just giving you my honest opinion. Nice try though.

Maybe it would work better on an amplifier that doesn't already have the "t" mod inside? Perhaps it was simply too much?

In case you didn't know what the S.T.D. was here it is directly from RichP714:

S.T.D ---- The lion's share of difference between the M-1.5t, M-1.0t and M-4.0t circuitry is in the feedback loop and output terminals; the 't' mod. While the 1.5, 1.0 and 4.0 have very similar feedback, a large difference between the 1.0 and others is the inclusion of a series resistor on the positive output terminals of the 1.5 and 4.0. In interviews, Bob Carver has said that he's determined that such a resistor is responsible for 90% of the 'tube' sound, and Sunfire equipment offers both current and voltage outputs.

The S.T.D. is a dongle type unit that has series resistors of the same value found in the M-4.0t. It features shoddy construction, plastic parts, and is only guaranteed to reduce the output power of the amplifier. Other than that, it's up to the demo guys to determine if it makes a difference (I haven't even tested it, but haven't you always wondered?).

RichP714
SILVER-7t
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:12 pm

Re: M-1.0t Mk II road show amplifier

Post by RichP714 » Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:33 pm

Stevefords comments:

Earlier today my amp came back from Rich - the M1.0t Mk. II option 002. That's a mouthful, I'll just call it the 2.2 for brevity's sake.
This replaced a freshly refurbished M1.0t in the upstairs system (generously lent to me by FesteLV, work done by Rolland) and the differences between the two were readily apparent:
The 2.2 has quite a bit more power (the word shitload springs to mind), the bass is a LOT stronger and so is the midrange.
A while back I was whining about no midrange controls on the Carver and Sunfire gear - I still would like a midrange control but the culprit, at least in this case, was the amp.
The most noticeable difference was that the soundstage was brought forward quite a bit. I was listening to a live Roxy Music cd and it was as if my seat changed from Row 53 to Row 7. It was, "Wow, this sounds f*ucking great!".
I switched over to an album and the soundstage shift wasn't nearly as pronounced. I'll have to play around with it more this evening.
This is just a quickie review; if anyone is interested, I'll bring the amp downstairs and compare it to his M500t Mk. II.
The rooms are totally different as are the speakers, cd player and preamp.
The upstairs system has driven me kind of crazy, it was always something's not right, something's missing, something something something I don't know what. Interconnects, cd player, preamp, room configuration, something...
What was missing is this amp.
If you have an M1.0t, scrape up the dough and send it to RichP. You will be astounded at what he turns your amp into.
No, I don't get a kickback, his work is just that impressive.

User avatar
engtaz
"TAZ"
Posts: 5393
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:43 pm
Location: Tampa, FL

Re: M-1.0t Mk II road show amplifier

Post by engtaz » Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:01 pm

Alison Krauss:
Beautiful vocals more forward then the 1.5t
Instruments are articulate.
Highs are a little forward. Not a bad thing. I love how it brings out the vocals.
Has kick. Dang Rich, what a sweet amp.

Kansas:
Same as A Krauss

Supertramp:
Same as A Krauss.

If I was to describe the differences, 1,5t flat response and 1.0t a little more forward (not what so ever, a bad thing) It’s more like buying a newer amp and everything has more punch.

Usually when I listen to different types of music, I was expecting difference with each amp. They both held constant in the sound for each.


My sons review:

Weezer - “The greatest man that ever lived”
Great balance on the 1.5t Its all equal sounding.
1.0t is definitely pushing vocals at you with great quality

Reliant K- “When I go down”.
Again, good balance on the 1.5t and it works well with rock/ acoustic elements of song.
1.0t is pushing the vocals in your face which makes the song (a lot of singing with acoustic guitar then big bass comes in later) really beautiful. Great for all songs with good vocals.

I would say that the 1.5t is best if you like a good even sound. The 1.0t is good if you love the vocals in a song, amazing sound for them. The voices kick out a little more.

It’s funny that my son and my taste in music is different but are observations are the same.


engtaz
engtaz


Carver M4.0T in front channels to Caver AL VI's in SACD & 2 Channel setup
C 16, PT 2400, Slim Device, Carver TX-8, 490T and Rega TT w Grado Gold cart in the 2 channel setup
Bogen SRB20 is computer amp
Carver PM-350 donated for youth church use

User avatar
Magic_Physicist
TFM-6cb
Posts: 267
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 4:39 am
Location: Port Ludlow Washington

Re: someone here

Post by Magic_Physicist » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:43 am

(OK I edited this and erased that "spam quote" )

You actually get spam here?

If you need a middle of the night moderator email me......I have melted down hundreds of them for ESPN over the years.

(oh and I own a .50cal Desert Eagle 8) )

I see this clown did it 9 times so far.

(I imagine you get the IP's here)

Post Reply

Return to “Amplifiers”