Preamps - Analysis and Reviews

[pkane2001]

18 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

The preamp in a DAC is never going to be as good as separate quality preamp component. 

 

Never? How can you be so sure that adding one more complex, active component with additional interconnects in the path of analog signal will improve signal quality?

 

[pkane2001]

11 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

You go ahead and get a DAC with a built-in preamp if it makes you happy. I'll be using a tube-based preamp and be happier for it.....

 

I've not had a separate preamp in my systems for about 25 years. Can highly recommend trying this with the right DAC and amp combo.

 

[pkane2001]

10 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

 

 

I didn't like receivers or integrated amplifiers 30 years ago and I don't like DACs with preamps or integrated amplifiers now. You want to compromise your listening experience, go right ahead. I am not doing it.....

 

I've not found a preamp that sounds as transparent or as dynamic as a DAC with a quality class A discrete output stage without a preamp. But totally your choice, of course.

 

[pkane2001]

3 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

You obviously have never tried a quality preamp before......you are simply out of touch with reality.

 

Great! Thanks for the in-depth analysis. Enjoy your preamps.

[pkane2001]

6 minutes ago, 4est said:

Sometimes less is, well, less.

 

In audio, less is frequently more. Simpler circuits, fewer components, fewer interconnects, fewer power supplies, all lead to a system that is easier to make work well, with less noise and fewer bad interactions.

 

It frightens me to see the sheer number of components  and widgets some audiophiles put in the signal path. This is usually an indication that they don't understand their systems and are randomly trying out various patches and hacks because someone said that they might help.

[pkane2001]

1 hour ago, 4est said:

You make that sound as if there is no reason for a preamp to exist or that it is some new fangled device. Traditionally the preamp was used not only as a selector, but as a buffer fore and aft the attenuator. Those were and still are good reasons. I've yet to hear a DAC direct that wasn't helped by a great preamp. I am sure there are some, but I've yet to hear one.

 

Oh, no, I make no such claims. Only our race car driving friend deals in such absolutes. All I'm pointing out is that with the right DAC and amp combo, a preamp is not needed, and will only make things worse.

[pkane2001]

13 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Sound color. I think everyone's trying to get the purist sound from the recording as possible through elimination of noise while coloring the sound with different devices so that it still sounds good to them.

 

The preamp colors the sound too.  All those I tried sounded different.  It just happens to do it in a more impactful way than most other devices out there.  Only the speakers have a bigger impact and we know they all sound different as well.  Whatever gets you to the place where your sound system sounds beautiful to you regardless of what music you pump through it is the way to go.  It doesn't matter if the pre is in the DAC or not. 

Absolutely, I agree with most of your points. I have my own biases about what 'good' sounds like. But, I'm of the thought that the best, most faithful reproduction of recorded music is the best, and that's what guides my component selection, system tuning, and yes, even clean-up gadget selection.

 

I've played around with digital EQ for a long while. Flat EQ didn't sound right initially, so a bit of a boost in the bass and a roll-off above 3KHz seemed to be the solution, although I've long struggled with why that should be the case. It just didn't seem right that distorting frequency response from what's recorded should make it sound better. 

 

Recently, after further tuning my system with a new DAC and implementing minimum phase FIR filters, I've switched back to flat EQ. Interestingly, this sounds best to me now (over both, speakers and headphones) compared to all the house curves I've tried. I suspect that previously my system was just not tuned enough to allow for a faithful reproduction and now it's nudged just a bit closer to that ideal.  I myself try, and also advocate to others, to try to look for a deeper reason as to why a system may need these audiophile-beloved clean-up gadgets, various hacks, and yes, even preamps. There may just be a much simpler and better-sounding solution through simplification and proper component selection.

[pkane2001]

7 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

 

I disagree with the "if it sounds 'good' to me that's all I need, I don't care if my idea of good sound is different from others" attitude. I believe that 'real' sounds good, and anything that differs from that is wrong. Music-loving audiophiles should recalibrate their ears as often as is possible. One should do that by listening to as much live, unamplified music as is practicable. If one keeps reminding one's self what the real thing sounds like, one is less likely to go off the rails. If you find that you prefer overly bright highs, and boomy bass, you should at least know that's not what real music sounds like, even if you believe that's what real music should sound like!

 

I agree with your sentiment about the need to hear live, unamplified music. I live not far from NY city and go to various live performances and concert halls at every opportunity. I also play the piano, and its sound has been one of my main measuring sticks for tuning my system. 

 

But, I also think that whether or not you know what 'unamplified music' or the 'real thing' sounds like, you will not be able to get that from a large number of recordings, no matter what you do to your system. If you are trying to tune each recording to sound like what you think it should sound like, you'll wind up chasing your tail. Some recordings will sound better, some worse with every adjustment. The only reasonably achievable goal is to try to faithfully reproduce what was recorded. That's about as good as your system can possibly get and no more.