Here is my review of the Dude and its comparison with Charlie's X-2 preamp. I posted it on my system but also writing it here.
I used to be a brand name guy longtime ago but not any more. None of my audio gear is Stereophile reviewed. My speakers, the Apogee Fullrange, were never reviewed. The smaller Apogee Diva was a Stereophile Class ‘A’ component. After having lived several Divas, it is safe to say the Fullrange walks over the Diva, making the class rating irrelevant. My CD player, TRL moded Sony, replaced my Meridian Reference player and was never reviewed, at least not to my knowledge. The amp, TRL GT-800, was never reviewed either but for me it is the final frontier in amps. The cables, by Element Cables, are beginning to get reviewed but I discovered them long ago at my own. They are so cheap too. Then I found the X-2 pre-amp, just through sheer coincidence.
This is similar to my taste in clothes. My suits are custom-made, mostly in Hong Kong, made without a brand name but with fine fabric and tailoring craftsmanship, and most importantly at 3-5 times lower price. A salesman at a big name clothing store that I happen to know was keen to see custom-made suits, so I took one with me. The quality of the fabric and finishing was enough to make his and his colleagues eyes pop out -- I did not even have to tell them the price. Big brand names carry a lot of psychological advantage which is usually factored into the price. And for some people, higher price tags unconsciously make an item superior. Not trying to be snobbish here. Drawing a parallel between clothes (substitute here your favorite collections) and audio, I am trying to say that I spend my hard-earned money (especially these days) very carefully and I do so for the value rather than the brand. I am not a brand guy. That does not make all big brands junk to my eyes and ears but the brand name alone will not be able to convince me. When it comes to audio, my only criterion is sound quality tested by me and not if it has is a big brand. The Dude is bit like a custom-made outfit with finest components and craftsmanship. But it had to convince me on what it is supposed to do: Its sound quality and nothing else.
Pual Weitzel believes in a very extended time period for break-in. Therefore, I had to give the Dude at least two months. Paul was right, the Dude sound improved a hell of a lot over this period, changing rapidly in the first week and then steadily until now. I have high regards for Paul who strikes me as man with very high audio IQ (his business IQ is another story though). So far whatever he has said about anything in audio (amp, CD player, components, crossovers, drivers, woofers, tweeters, caps, inductors, etc.) he has always been right so far and whatever he has produced has been a sheer master piece. Yet, I believe more in my own listening than I trust anyone else’s opinion. This overrides my good relationship with Paul who has been always very nice and generous. I find his service to be honest and caring although he can be slow in fulfilling his promises. But I should mention that I first discovered Paul’s products and then Paul himself, not the other way round. Thus, when Paul told me about the Dude, I politely declined. So satisfied was I with Charlie’s X-2 preamp that the idea of getting the Dude did not come to my mind even though I heard good things about it. But then people say good things about several things anyway. I do not have to try everything good out there, did I? But when Paul offered to lend me his Dude, I accepted. How could it hurt?
But the Dude was up against the giant, the Charlie X-2. There is no snake oil in Charlie’s X-2 Its fantastic sound can be attributed to the extremely robust and regulated power supply benefitting from Charlie’s decades of experience and the video op-amp based topology inspired by research papers published in Audio Amateur magazine At the same time, I did not doubt that the Dude would be a good preamp. If Paul can design an amp like the GT-800, he *can* also design a great pre-amp. Thus, the main question was how it would compare to the X-2, and would I consider buying it. This may not be too irrelevant of a question for other people including those reading this forum because the Dude is against something which I consider to be supremely good and possibly an ultimate pre-amp with almost zero distortion, flattest frequency response and sheer transparency, resolution, and dynamics.
Since the X-2 was a winner over the Lamm L2 (the Lamm was sweeter on human voice though, because of its FET coloration but considerably shy in bass and dynamics), and swiftly knocked down several contenders such as the Conrad Johnson 17LS, Audio Valve Aclipse, BAT VK-51, Sim Audio Moon, etc. Recently, I lent the X-2 (I own two versions of it) to a friend who has the Audio Valve Aclipse. This friend who is a serious audiophile with extensive knowledge and good ears was stunned at the difference that he heard. He called me the next day and all he could say was “what have you done to my system and me?” The point of all this is that if the Dude can outperform the X-2 then by induction it has to be better than the other competitors that the X-2 has beaten. Thus, the relative comparison with the X-2 is important, which also raises another question, that is, if anything in X-2 can be bettered and furthermore if the Dude can do so.
The Due is well made. I really like its case as well as its knobs, on/off switch, and overall finishing. It does not come with any remote but I do not care about that. It just adds to the cost and most serious listeners think a remote control circuitry can degrade the sound. I should mention that the resolution and transparency of my system is to a point of saturation where further improvements are unlikely And so is the acoustic of my listening room that I have tuned to my liking after extensive experimentation. The system is astonishing revealing and I am so familiar with its sound that I can blindly tell even a fly is sitting on my speaker cables (figuratively speaking because no insects are not allowed in my listening room).
Well, now on to the comparison. The comparison between the Dude and X-2 was extensive, lasting more than a month. They competition was stiff, much closer than I thought even thought I must say I did not know what to expect. In fact, I started with a clear head without any presumption but expected to make a conclusion fast. Over a period of one month, I switched them several times and listened very carefully for a variety of music. I was very watchfully observing their characteristics such as resolution, transparency, bass, midrange, highs, dynamics, soundstage, depth, and imaging.
The two pre-amps sound different, which is a bit of surprise because if they are both neutral, which they both claim and are supposed to be, then they should sound the same. But they do not. That means one of them or both are not neutral, or there is no such thing as neutral sound. Yet they both sound fantastic, so much so that I do not miss the Dude if I am listening to the X-2 and vice versa. And even more interesting is that fact I cannot let either one go. They both are just fabulous. As I listened on, I began to appreciate how great the Dude was since I was very familiar with the X-2 sound. But I still had to keep the fundamental question in mind, that is which one is the winner. I could not find the answer to that question, with my opinion switching after every listening session. As I listened more, I appreciated the qualities of both of them and found it increasingly more difficult to pick one. In fact, I thought the match was a draw. And what about any weaknesses or areas of improve? To answer that we have to examine in details how the Dude and X-2 performed in different areas of sound.
The Dude’s mains strengths are its prodigious bass, dynamics, and width of the soundstage. The Dude does not sound “bass-heavy” and nor does the X-2 sound “bass light”. It is just that the bass in the Dude has more weight while being clean. Furthermore, the Dude bass is very musical and powerful, making the orchestral music more dramatic. The soundstage produced by the Dude is about 10% wider than the X-2 but the X-2 has better central imaging. The treble of the Dude is full and lush and not recessed or rolled off even though the X-2 has more prominent highs.
The Dude outperforms the X-2 in these areas, not the latter is a slouch by any measure, and vice versa. The resolution and details are identical in the two pre-amps. The X-2 is a bit more extended in the highs. The X-2 is also more transparent. But again, when I say one is better than the other in a certain area, I do not mean the other one is lacking anything. The Dude has w wider soundstage and bit more 3D effect. But the “touch effect” (you feel you can touch the singer or instrument) is more prominent in the X-2.
Overall, it is extremely difficult to choose the winner and the match seems to be a draw. This may sound like a political statement but it is not. Now if you threaten to shoot me unless I pick one winner then I would have to say it is the X-2. The reasons are: more extended highs of the X-2 and its ability to drive long cables, and that the Dude runs out of steam at very high volume (which is due to my 25 feet long interconnects and will not be problem in other systems). I made this observation after a month because I do not usually listen to very high volume at good volumes, I never noticed this – in fact, the Dude was a bit more dynamic than the X-2. I also want a bit more midrange and greater transparency from the Dude. Thus, there is a little room for improvement in the Dude while there is nothing I can do to improve the X-2. About 6 months ago, Charlie did add an option FET stage in the X-2 to make its midrange sweeter but it took away the other magic and I rejected that mod. In summary, if the X-2 is 99/100, the Dude is 98/100. But this does not end here. I have had long discussions with Paul about the potential improvements I have sent the Dude back to Paul to improve its power supply, output current level to overcome long cables at high volume, and higher quality tubes to have a bit more extended midrange and highs. These mods will cost extra.
Of course, there will be still room for improvement through tube rolling. In the comparison, the Dude is also getting an unfair disadvantage because I already have a preamp that I like very much and the replacement if any has to be better not just equal. Otherwise, I see no reason to spend money. So the fact that I have purchased the Dude is an indicative of my confidence in it.
The verdict though marginally in favor of the X-2 is not so firm though and definitely not final. I lent the Dude and X-2 to the guy (I mentioned above) who was overwhelmed with the X-2. He tells me that even though he was astonished with the X-2, the Dude is even better in his system. That also makes sense. In audio it is all about component matching.
When the Dude returns from Paul with additioal improvements, I expect it to return with a vengeance. It is very capable of beating the X-2 and it might. We will see. But one thing is certain: both the Dude and X-2 deliver absolutely the very best one can expect from a pre-amp. Since the X-2 is no longer made and Charlie has disappointed more than 50 interested people (clearly, his business IQ is extremely low), and I personally apologize to all of them, the Dude is an uncrowned king of pre-amps at least in my audio realm. You do not need to spend mega bucks on big brand names. The Dude will be better, I can confidently bet on it. If Paul’s Tube Research Labs were an established big name in audio and the Dude would carry a price tag of $30,000, I wonder in what category audio magazines would place it. A+ or A++?
