Jump to content
IGNORED

Preamps - Analysis and Reviews


Johnseye

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, pooger said:

So, if you have a correct impedance, and the front end gain of your amp matches the output of your DAC's output stage, you honestly think that adding additional interconnects, passive and active components,along withb

 their associated power supplies, is going to do anything but add noise and /or alter the signal — be careful about who you say is out of touch with reality...

Sometimes less is, well, less.

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment
1 minute ago, gmgraves said:

An awful lot of people disagree with you. I know a number of people who own Freyas, and all of them found that the passive mode sounds better than either of the active modes. The best I've heard was a British- made transformer based "preamp". It had a stepped volume control that switched different taps on the transformers in and out to change the gain. Sorry, I don't recall the make.

Music First using Stevens and Billinton xformers?

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment
1 minute ago, pkane2001 said:

 

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.

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.

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment
1 minute ago, gmgraves said:

 

If that were strictly correct and all the preamp did was provide switching and a buffer stage before and after the volume control, the line-in inputs would all be unity gain. But all active preamps generally provide about +10dB of gain for the high-level inputs (of course that doesn't include the phono stage, if any).

The buffering is often still there.

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment
Just now, mansr said:

A DAC can surely have a volume control and output buffer built in. If it does, an additional pre-amp in front of the power amp serves no purpose beyond the role of input selector.

Of course, but they do not seem to perform as well from my experiences.

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...