How important are preamps (comparatively speaking)

[realhifi]

Thanks all...I should have clarified more what I was seeking. I was mainly wanting to know if there was as distinguishable difference in SQ between brands for preamps. I have mostly used recievers most of my life, but at someone elses suggestion I tried a NAD amplifier and I noticed a relatively easy difference in SQ. Currently I am just using my denon receiver's pre-outs to the NAD amp. I am mainly wondering if I will be able to identify a big difference in SQ by using a preamp vs a receiver's pre-outs. I know I will always have some sort of preamp or receiver pre-outs as a means of control...my main question was if there is a dramatic difference in SQ between brands as there is for amps.

 

Best way to find out if it's important to you is to try one or two out in your system to see if it makes a difference or not. I'm with Barry on this one as I think they definitely make a difference. Whether or not its one that makes a difference to you only you can say.

 

And yes, there is a difference between brands, models, cost, etc. again, only you can say if it that difference is "dramatic". Try it and see.

[realhifi]

Whether or not you hear a difference between your receivers preamp section and a dedicated preamp depends on the dedicated preamp. I know that I can hear differences between preamps in my system, but it depends on the rest of your system of course, and how much importance you place on sonic attributes such as soundstage, imaging, etc. If you just want a volume knob, then what you have is fine.

 

Sounds about right to me.

 

I see you are new, welcome!

[mav52]

Best way to find out if it's important to you is to try one or two out in your system to see if it makes a difference or not. I'm with Barry on this one as I think they definitely make a difference. Whether or not its one that makes a difference to you only you can say.

 

And yes, there is a difference between brands, models, cost, etc. again, only you can say if it that difference is "dramatic". Try it and see.

 

And yes, there is a difference between brands, models, cost, etc. again, only you can say if it that difference is "dramatic". Try it and see.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with your statement. I have two different pre-amps and there is a big difference in sq between the two. One tubed, one is SS.

 

You either want a pre-amp in your system or you don't , I happen to like a pre-amp in my system. Nice to have a choice.

[bluesman]

I admit I'm making a BIG assumption here and that is that no piece of equipment can ever add anything to the sound, it can only modify or take away.

"Add" and "modify" are not mutually exclusive, e.g. distortion (both harmonic and IM). The problem, if you want to call it a problem, is that many people prefer the sound of music with such additions / modifications to the input signal (like added even-order harmonic distortion because it sounds "richer", "fuller" etc to them). A little harmonic enhancement can make a lot of dry or otherwise suboptimal source material sound more immediate and "live" to many.

 

And the simple factor of SPL can change one's perception of SQ. It's been well established through extensive research over many years that most listeners prefer the sound of the same program material through the same system when it's even a fraction of a dB louder within the range of normal listening levels. So inserting and removing even a passive attenuator into the signal chain can result in perceived changes in SQ that are related not to the shape of the waveform but to its amplitude.

[mlevinson]

To me i am not convinced that a cheap dac over PC usb is better SQ than streaming DSD to a receiver and let it do the decoding. You avoid pc issues (os, power supply, usb, dac power supply, etc...) by streaming. Onkyo has burr brown dacs and you can buy a used reciever and have your dac, network streamer, DLNA, USB, preamp, all in one $195 box, and then just use the preouts of it to a nice amp. At least this is route I am going to try next. I have tried many things already including dragonfly, low cost usb dac, Sony highend Dac, and i am not convinced the SQ has been any better than DLNA to an AVR DSD decoders....at least for the lower end budget usb dacs.

 

I certainly agree with this. The beauty of a receiver is that internal components were designed to work together. How well they were designed to work together is another question, but the same can be said for separate components.

 

I use a Cambridge Audio 751R for my living room and I use it's internal DAC fed from my Sonos system and am very impressed with it. It was designed with a very nice toroidal power transformer, highly biased transistors and a well executed volume control. It all adds up to make some really, really nice music. It's not cheap, especially for a receiver - but compared to other receivers I listened to it was clearly in another league sonically.

 

In my experience boutique companies like Cambridge choose to compromise on cutting edge features instead focusing on SQ. Most of the other AVR's I listened to certainly had slicker GUI's, more advanced DSP/room correction - but sounded thin, flat and lifeless. The Cambridge is anything but.

 

So, in summary - there are some really nice receivers being built today. As always, there are no absolutes regarding what is "better". Everyone wants different things from their system, so take your time and figure out what is most important and follow that trail.

[Mike Mcsweeney]

I certainly agree with this. The beauty of a receiver is that internal components were designed to work together. How well they were designed to work together is another question, but the same can be said for separate components.

 

I use a Cambridge Audio 751R for my living room and I use it's internal DAC fed from my Sonos system and am very impressed with it. It was designed with a very nice toroidal power transformer, highly biased transistors and a well executed volume control. It all adds up to make some really, really nice music. It's not cheap, especially for a receiver - but compared to other receivers I listened to it was clearly in another league sonically.

 

In my experience boutique companies like Cambridge choose to compromise on cutting edge features instead focusing on SQ. Most of the other AVR's I listened to certainly had slicker GUI's, more advanced DSP/room correction - but sounded thin, flat and lifeless. The Cambridge is anything but.

 

So, in summary - there are some really nice receivers being built today. As always, there are no absolutes regarding what is "better". Everyone wants different things from their system, so take your time and figure out what is most important and follow that trail.

I wouldnt mind spending more, but i really would love getting all "the leading edge features" (dlna,dsd/flac decoding, hdmi,usb,streaming) all in one box. I read so much on this site about having to optimize the os of the pc, the power supply issues of pc and the dac, etc...that i think i will be happy just streaming flac/dsd to an avr dacs, and forego the external dac and associated pc problems.

[mlevinson]

I believe you may be overthinking the external DAC. All the tweaks listed on this site aren't really necessary. I have plugged my Mac straight into my DAC using a cheap USB cable and streamed from iTunes and gotten really good sound. Can it be improved upon, absolutely... but don't let all those tweaks/upgrades scare you away if you want to try it out.

[stan]

Just posted this on the DAC Forum and think it is relevent to this thread.

 

"I had a "click" problem when playing directly from DAC to power Amp.

Every 44 kHz cd I played started with a click.

The first time I played a 96 kHz cd the speakers nearly exploded except for the power Amp clipping feature saving the day.

Finally I put a pre Amp back in the system and the clicking stopped completly."

 

Note: I am using a Bricasti M1 DAC.

 

Stan

[shum3s]

I use a Burson Conductor with a built in preamp and i have an SP8 dedicated preamp. The SP8 is better that the Burson when using as a preamp. I recommend a high quality preamp.

 

Jim, I had the opposite experience with the Burson 160-D pre Dac, the model the Conductor replaced. I was using a CJ 17 LS tube preamp that cost almost four times the Burson, I ended up keeping the Burson, and sold the CJ. Go figured!

[Mike Mcsweeney]

I believe you may be overthinking the external DAC. All the tweaks listed on this site aren't really necessary. I have plugged my Mac straight into my DAC using a cheap USB cable and streamed from iTunes and gotten really good sound. Can it be improved upon, absolutely... but don't let all those tweaks/upgrades scare you away if you want to try it out.

I have tried it out a lot already. I have had low, mid, and relatively higher priced dacs. I have also tried dac in sony blurays over dlna and direct from SACD. The best I have heard so far is using DSD. My point is that I think I would be impressed with DSD encoded by a dsd capable avr over dlna in comparison to playing same file from pc to external dac. I will know soon enough..i bought a used dsd capable avr on ebay and it's on it's way. I will try first just using the usb slot on the avr and playing dsd files....and then dlna....completely taking the pc out of the picture except to just render the files over network.

[coot]

I don't have a preamp but I do know my Placette Volume Control Unit very definitely makes an improvement in sq. I was planning to sell it when I got the W4S dac which has volume control but changed my mind when I noticed the nice difference.

[wakibaki]

I desire a preamp for its inputs and volume control. My amp has neither. I like versatility (e.g. cd,usb,dlna,aux,phono)...so i guess you would say "i need", based on my versatility desires. Of course i could use an integrated amp/receiver instead. I have to admit though, plugging my samsung mega directly into the back of the NAD amp and playing a flac file sounded pretty impressive even without any external dac. I think the answers i have read that sounded the best was that the power supply in the preamp will make a difference when comparing. That is probably why the NAD amp sounds better than any other reciever i have ever used. THe difference even to my untrained ears was quite significant. The power supply is pretty heavy...and that may be the difference. I also agree that it is probably cleaner better if i went directly to the amp with a dac without going through a preamp of other sorts first.

 

OK, well I can understand that, anyone might desire switching and volume (and even tone) controls, but ideally you don't want any excess gain. The modern trend is to call a potentiometer a 'passive preamp', precisely because it mimics the volume control that a preamp typically provides, however I feel this is misleading, or at least potentially confusing. I prefer anything with 'amp' in the name to actually amplify.

 

I'm just pointing out how ideally a system should be dimensioned.

 

Sources range in output from <0.0005V to ~2V Peak-to-Peak. ~2V is not atypical of a tube power amplifier input requirement for full output. This means that the low-voltage sources (magnetic cartridges) often require a preamp to enable them to drive a power stage, but a CD player may be able to get full volume without anything in between but wires.

 

Problems can arise, however, if a preamp with substantial gain is used with a high-output source, such as a CD player or DAP. The most obvious is that the system may clip, as the signal voltage attempts excursions precluded by the supply at that point. Things are fine for a while because you don't turn up the volume on your own, but then you have a party, lots of people talking shouting dancing, turn up the music, bye-bye system...

 

It's not that difficult to arrange a preset or presets to equalise and restrain the outputs from a number of sources. A separate (hidden) volume control to equalise all the sources. You just want to add and discard as little gain as possible, because it has implications for the system noise, but as long as you're not doing anything extreme it should remain sub-audible.

 

@sandyk

 

Hi Alex,

 

I still care passionately about this subject. Since I stopped working I started putting my spare energy into sharing my skills, it occupies me. I have to conserve my energy now to manage the necessities though, so I don't have much to spare for hobby electronics. Glad to see you're still contributing.

 

Fred

[sandyk]

Hi Alex,

 

I still care passionately about this subject. Since I stopped working I started putting my spare energy into sharing my skills, it occupies me. I have to conserve my energy now to manage the necessities though, so I don't have much to spare for hobby electronics. Glad to see you're still contributing.

 

Fred

 

Hi Fred

Keep up the good fight !

Best Wishes

Alex

[Mike Mcsweeney]

OK, well I can understand that, anyone might desire switching and volume (and even tone) controls,

Fred

 

Am i to understand that you and a number of people don't have a preamp or reciever or other switching method? I guess all you use is files then? No cd, no vinyl, no other input at all? If you and others don't have any other way to switch you are stuck with only one input? As popular as file music has become, I am really surprised there are so many that don't have some switching method for multiple inputs...

[davidbeinct]

Am i to understand that you and a number of people don't have a preamp or reciever or other switching method? I guess all you use is files then? No cd, no vinyl, no other input at all? If you and others don't have any other way to switch you are stuck with only one input? As popular as file music has become, I am really surprised there are so many that don't have some switching method for multiple inputs...

 

Many DACs have multiple digital inputs and kind of function as a "digital only" preamp, if you will. So files, streaming, disks (from a player with digital out), and cable/satellite TV can all be done. With an A/D converter one could upload all one's vinyl to files too.

[wakibaki]

Am i to understand that you and a number of people don't have a preamp or reciever or other switching method?

 

That's true in some instances.

 

I have a number of DAPs and phones. I would normally listen to them using a headphone amplifier, which has a volume control.

 

In the living room, if I want music, I connect my tablet to the TV via HDMI. This means I can stream music and video from the NAS over wi-fi, thru the TV, which outputs its sound thru some vintage Celestions powered by a T-amp. The T-amp has no volume control, but the TV does, and I can select the cable receiver or Bluray's HDMI with the remote. I control the tablet with a remote Bluetooth keyboard/mouse.

 

In the bedroom I have a similar arrangement where the TV drives a pair of Audio Nirvana FRs via a T-amp, this time with a volume control. The TV has a Digital Terrestrial RX, you can plug a USB stick into it and play video or music off it, or there's a cable receiver. Again you get TV volume and tone controls. All this works from bed with remotes.

 

None of these systems are what you would call really high end, but I'm a musician, and I can promise you they all meet or exceed the PL12D/Rogers/B&W system I ran in the '70s, and all that vinyl is gone, gone.

 

Of course I'm talking about the electronics. The speakers are the same. I mean actually the same in some cases.

 

In my studio I have DAW with PCI card. It connects to an 8-channel mixer. The output from this, the TV, the Bluray, the satellite Rx all go to a Cambridge Audio amp with input switching. The amp has a volume control too.

 

All the signals are at line levels, or intended to drive headphones, so no preamp is required, in the sense of amplification, although obviously I am making use of some built-in switching and volume controls. I can even tweak the bass and treble with the TV controls.

 

All this stuff is part of my life, so it has to serve me immediately and seamlessly. I want the good sound to come on automatically for my wife. I admit that I've been lucky with the compatibility of levels, but if I wanted to run a turntable I could find a free input to feed it into and use a preamp on that channel alone.

 

A lot of these devices (disk players, satellite rxs) have an Ethernet port, so you can access YouTube or internet TV direct.

 

A lot of people will find it hard to live with using the unknown circuitry and DAC in the TV. To them I would say, 'Remember the Tom's Hardware review'.

 

It's possible to route all this stuff to avoid doing so. You can use an external S/PDIF DAC. It's not possible, however, to do it more cheaply or conveniently. For the large part, the TV, with its onscreen menu, has become the switch.

[phusis]

Barry doesn't use DSP either. Barry goes to a great deal of trouble with his choice of microphone cables,interconnects and power cables at the recording stage, so why use additional DSP later and destroy those subtle but worthwhile gains ?

I am looking forward to hearing the latest 24/192 recording session from Barry that was done in a church, using those new cables. Even the "making of" video that is on line shows it's potential, despite the audio being limited to 187kilobits .aac audio.

 

sandyk --

 

Not sure I quite follow your reply here and how it's addressed at me, but here goes:

 

The only DSP I'm using is the dithered 24-bit internal digital volume control of JRiver MC20. To my ears a properly implemented digital volume control sans hardware preamp, even though bit truncation may occur at the effective listening level, is the preferred solution over a hardware preamp (tried out in different incarnations) with an analogue volume ditto (this is also a function of me not using any other sources, such as an analogue source for LP playback for example). Of course there's more to this comparison than volume controls alone, such as the whole apparatus of a hardware preamp (w/cables) and the out-/input impedance integration of DAC-direct to poweramp. Given a successful pairing however, which I believe it is in my setup, I strongly prefer the latter solution. Perhaps a new DAC will be implemented sometime next year in the likely form of a SOtM sDP-1000, which houses a supposedly excellent preamp - with attenuation in the analogue domain (i.e.: I don't hold any investment in digital attenuation per se), so we'll se how that turns out.

 

DSP or not, which I believe can be implemented successfully on a broader scale, I'm definately not in the camp of "320 kbps is more than enough," on the contrary. On Class D vs. Class A/B and A amps I believe it all depends. I recently went from Class D to pure Class A (NuForce ST8.5V3 to Belles SA-30), and it made a significant impact for the better. I never expected 30 Class A watts to sound markedly more powerful and effortless (among its other added virtues) than 150 watts Class D, but what that says about amp topology/type I couldn't tell.

[bluesman]

Am i to understand that you and a number of people don't have a preamp or reciever or other switching method? I guess all you use is files then? No cd, no vinyl, no other input at all? If you and others don't have any other way to switch you are stuck with only one input? As popular as file music has become, I am really surprised there are so many that don't have some switching method for multiple inputs...

But we do have multiple switched inputs. Many DACs (like my Emotiva Stealth DC-1 and at least one Benchmark) have multiple digital inputs plus a stereo analog input, so you can switch among internet radio, CDs/DVDs, PC audio, network streamers etc and a line level analog input. I run a preamp output into the analog input on my DAC so I can listen to vinyl - but there's no "named" preamp in my listening chain except when listening to records. Even my HD FM tuner has a digital output.

 

As far as I know, every DAC with enough output voltage to drive a power stage directly has a voltage gain stage after the DAC chip(s) that is technically a "preamp" stage. Even if there is a DAC chip with enough output voltage to drive a power stage directly, it must have some onboard voltage gain after the convertor stage.

 

Some DACs (e.g. the Furutech GT40) even have a phono stage, so you can switch among phono, line level analog, and USB sources without an external preamp.

[tranz]

Kind of a side thought. Has anyone ever used two pre-amps with one power amp?

 

For example a stereo DAC with built in pre-amp directly to the power amp, and another receiver for home theater to the same power amp.

[cjf]

Kind of a side thought. Has anyone ever used two pre-amps with one power amp?

 

For example a stereo DAC with built in pre-amp directly to the power amp, and another receiver for home theater to the same power amp.

 

It could certainly be done but would involve a subpar/noise infested splitter of some flavor prior to the Amp and more cabling which adds to the chances of noise finding its way into the system.

 

A lesser evil would be a dedicated Pre with Home Theater Bypass / Loopback capabilities.

[beerandmusic]

But we do have multiple switched inputs. Many DACs (like my Emotiva Stealth DC-1 and at least one Benchmark) have multiple digital inputs plus a stereo analog input, so you can switch among internet radio, CDs/DVDs, PC audio, network streamers etc and a line level analog input. I run a preamp output into the analog input on my DAC so I can listen to vinyl - but there's no "named" preamp in my listening chain except when listening to records. Even my HD FM tuner has a digital output.

 

 

Ok, thanks wakibaki and bluesman...i never thought about getting a dac with an analog input & volume vs a dac to a preamp...just antoher option i have to consider. How do you think that new marantz pm7005 dac/amp would compare ...i like the idea that it has both a phono input, analog input, and volume control....i wish it had network vs amplifier though, and i haven't heard much about the cirrus dac they are using...CS4398 DAC