Shindo CC80 vs CCQ

Mike

Mike

Audioshark
Staff member
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
30,488
Location
Sarasota, FL
Jerome has the CCQ amps and another friend of mine has the CC80 amps. Can anyone describe the differences sonically and otherwise?

Would either be sonically superior to D'Yquems on 100db efficient speakers?

I know there is a lot of "depends" in the answers....but just generally speaking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike,
Just my guess since I never heard the D'Yquem amps.
SET amplifiers are just the best technical option to amplify a signal. With the adequate speaker, and a more than 100 dB speakers is adequate, at least if the load presented to the amp is above 6 or 8 ohms, then a SET gives a pure and direct sound : you feel instantly connected to the performance.
A push pull amplifier never achieves this level of connection to the source. It may sound extremely good, it still misses the last degrees of the magic of the SET.
With the right speaker, I have zero doubt that the D'Yquem will be musically superior to both the CCQs or the CC80.



Envoyé de mon iPhone à l'aide de Tapatalk
 
For which speakers?

I preferred the Lafons to both CCQ and WE300bs. Have not heard the 80s though believe Matt has a used pair for sale.
 
The Lafons were plenty visceral the day I heard them, I'm targeting them for my West's but wonder about higher powered Shindo as well.
 
KeithR said:
For which speakers?

I preferred the Lafons to both CCQ and WE300bs. Have not heard the 80s though believe Matt has a used pair for sale.
Click to expand...

Which Lafons?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Jerome W said:
Mike,
Just my guess since I never heard the D'Yquem amps.
SET amplifiers are just the best technical option to amplify a signal. With the adequate speaker, and a more than 100 dB speakers is adequate, at least if the load presented to the amp is above 6 or 8 ohms, then a SET gives a pure and direct sound : you feel instantly connected to the performance.
A push pull amplifier never achieves this level of connection to the source. It may sound extremely good, it still misses the last degrees of the magic of the SET.
With the right speaker, I have zero doubt that the D'Yquem will be musically superior to both the CCQs or the CC80.



Envoyé de mon iPhone à l'aide de Tapatalk
Click to expand...

This is also how I feel. If possible, I'll always take a set, even a parallel, over a push pull amp. Interestingly, I just read JV's review of the Wavelength Cardinals from 1994, which to my surprise, expressed the benefits of SET quite eloquently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
arthurs said:
The Lafons were plenty visceral the day I heard them, I'm targeting them for my West's but wonder about higher powered Shindo as well.
Click to expand...

did you ever try the Melody amps? Would love to hear a Melody vs LM comparison. Which tubes did you end up deciding on the for the LM?
 
There likely won't be too many people that have heard both amps, as there were only approx. 10 pairs of CCQ produced to my knowledge. Mine are #17 and 18, and were produced a year ago. As the model is now discontinued - CCQs will be hard to find.

I actually have heard both amps in my system, though not on the same day. Keep in mind that any comments are specific to my experience with my Verity Parsifals.

They are quite different amps despite inexplicably having similar names. The sound, tube complements, aesthetics - everything is different. I'd be curious to know why they share a name.

The CC80 is an excellent sounding amp, with that flow that Shindo is known for, and a nice top-to-bottom coherence. However, it has FAR less juice than the CCQ - CC80s can sound a bit stressed under the same load that CCQ's handle with grace. CCQ's have this uncanny ability to sound almost SET-like when playing low-level music, and yet they come ALIVE when the music gets more complex. By comparison, the CC80s sound a bit compressed to me, a little less "glowing" on low-level music and a little less exciting on more dynamic passages. As would be expected from an amp putting out half the power with new-production KT88's (as compared to the CCQ and its NOS EL-34's).

Sonically, the biggest difference is that the CCQs are richer sounding and a bit more "right". It's very much like the difference between a Monbrison and a Giscours: the CC80 is excellent in its own right, but the CCQ is better. To my ears.

As to Shindo SET - I haven't heard any, due to preferring speakers requiring more power. If I had your speakers, I'd certainly consider the D'Yquems though, but it can be hard to find ways to audition Shindo amps properly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
countingbackwards said:
There likely won't be too many people that have heard both amps, as there were only approx. 10 pairs of CCQ produced to my knowledge. Mine are #17 and 18, and were produced a year ago. As the model is now discontinued - CCQs will be hard to find.

I actually have heard both amps in my system, though not on the same day. Keep in mind that any comments are specific to my experience with my Verity Parsifals.

They are quite different amps despite inexplicably having similar names. The sound, tube complements, aesthetics - everything is different. I'd be curious to know why they share a name.

The CC80 is an excellent sounding amp, with that flow that Shindo is known for, and a nice top-to-bottom coherence. However, it has FAR less juice than the CCQ - CC80s can sound a bit stressed under the same load that CCQ's handle with grace. CCQ's have this uncanny ability to sound almost SET-like when playing low-level music, and yet they come ALIVE when the music gets more complex. By comparison, the CC80s sound a bit compressed to me, a little less "glowing" on low-level music and a little less exciting on more dynamic passages. As would be expected from an amp putting out half the power with new-production KT88's (as compared to the CCQ and its NOS EL-34's).

Sonically, the biggest difference is that the CCQs are richer sounding and a bit more "right". It's very much like the difference between a Monbrison and a Giscours: the CC80 is excellent in its own right, but the CCQ is better. To my ears.

As to Shindo SET - I haven't heard any, due to preferring speakers requiring more power. If I had your speakers, I'd certainly consider the D'Yquems though, but it can be hard to find ways to audition Shindo amps properly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What a great post. Thank you. Would love to see a picture of your system.

Also, have you heard the Lafon GM70's?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike said:
What a great post. Thank you. Would love to see a picture of your system.

Also, have you heard the Lafon GM70's?
Click to expand...

I'll get a photo up soon - my room isn't quite up to the beauty standards of some others around here, being that my music room is in the basement, but I've recently hit the post count required to post pictures.

I've never heard Lafon GM70's. The only Shindo amps I've heard are the 2 Montille's, the CC80 and the CCQ. I've heard the Montille's on Devore's and on my speakers, I've heard the CC80's on Wilson's and on my speakers, and the CCQ on my speakers only. I've read great things about Lafon GM70's, Haut Brion, Cortese and D'Yquem's. I suspect that all Shindo amps are great, it's just a matter of matching them to your system and preferences.
 
KeithR said:
did you ever try the Melody amps? Would love to hear a Melody vs LM comparison. Which tubes did you end up deciding on the for the LM?
Click to expand...
I did and found the Melody very nice but ultimately didn't have the refined sound, layering and space the LM does. I'm waiting on Psvane WE300B replicas and Amperex Holland long plates for the 12AX7.
 
The CCQs never failed to impress me.
They are power beasts and to my very own and personal ears, they made my 2301 bite the dust in direct comparison on the Wilson WP8's.
They sounded more powerful than the 300W Mcs, but also faster, more delicate and more refined. They subjectively seem to go lower and higher : much more opened at both ends of the spectrum.
They also sounded perfectly balanced and musical with the Rega RS10 speakers.
With my Harbeth 40.1, I had first a bass issue with them : invasive and huge powerful bass swallowing the rest of the spectrum.
Better isolation of the 40.1 and better position in the room solved the problem. Lots of work though.
To my ears, the 40.1 sound stunning with the CCQs.
Full, balanced, dynamic, refined....put all the terms of the audio bliss you want.
My 200W 2205 does not come close to them. The 225 is magic too but cannot reach the weight and presence of the CCQs.
Too bad Shindo discontinued the CCQs. They are tremendous amplifiers that I will keep for life.
I know that I am giving up a few degrees of magic bliss compared to a good SET though, and I would be very curious to hear them against the Wavac 805 monoblocks.



Envoyé de mon iPhone à l'aide de Tapatalk
 
Mike said:
What a great post. Thank you. Would love to see a picture of your system.

Also, have you heard the Lafon GM70's?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Being one owner out of ten pairs really makes you feel.....blessed !!


Envoyé de mon iPhone à l'aide de Tapatalk
 
arthurs said:
I did and found the Melody very nice but ultimately didn't have the refined sound, layering and space the LM does. I'm waiting on Psvane WE300B replicas and Amperex Holland long plates for the 12AX7.
Click to expand...

cool. which 845s were used in both?
 
Jerome W said:
The CCQs never failed to impress me.
They are power beasts and to my very own and personal ears, they made my 2301 bite the dust in direct comparison on the Wilson WP8's.
They sounded more powerful than the 300W Mcs, but also faster, more delicate and more refined. They subjectively seem to go lower and higher : much more opened at both ends of the spectrum.
They also sounded perfectly balanced and musical with the Rega RS10 speakers.
With my Harbeth 40.1, I had first a bass issue with them : invasive and huge powerful bass swallowing the rest of the spectrum.
Better isolation of the 40.1 and better position in the room solved the problem. Lots of work though.
To my ears, the 40.1 sound stunning with the CCQs.
Full, balanced, dynamic, refined....put all the terms of the audio bliss you want.
My 200W 2205 does not come close to them. The 225 is magic too but cannot reach the weight and presence of the CCQs.
Too bad Shindo discontinued the CCQs. They are tremendous amplifiers that I will keep for life.
I know that I am giving up a few degrees of magic bliss compared to a good SET though, and I would be very curious to hear them against the Wavac 805 monoblocks.



Envoyé de mon iPhone à l'aide de Tapatalk
Click to expand...

How much SET bliss do you think one gives up with CCQ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top