Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 4072 times.

cloudbaseracer

I have read through "What is the most important piece in a system?" but I did not want to hijack that thread so.

My question is what do you guys feel has changed the most over the last 15-20 years between a pre-amp and power amp? If you are in a shorter time window then please clarify.

I am asking because I am struggling with which products to gravitate towards.  I will most likely be getting the EE DAC so the front end is taken care of as I have never read so many positive reviews on one piece of gear.  I have my speakers GedLee Abbeys but need to get the middle sussed out! 

Part of me thinks to get a modern, well respected remote controlled pre-amp of possible tube design and then get something like a used McCormack DNA 125 amp.  I have heard such great things about these amps but never heard one in my system.

I do not mind buying all of the gear used so as long as the gear is well made I should be fine. Is a GREAT amp from 5-10 years ago just as good as what is currently available new but just doesn't have the appeal or new bling?  What about a pre-amp that was all the rage a few years back?  Is it clearly bested by a new one at the same price of that older used model?  Does the trickle down technology really work?  Is it more prevalent on the pre-amp side or the amp side?  Or, do you feel that they have both progressed at the same rate? Is it just different now but not really noticeably better?

Please give a manufacturer and model if you can on a piece of gear. That is always helpful to then search the used market and make a pricing comparison. And on that note, some of you may be wondering about a budget -- I guess I am thinking $1500 - $3000 used for the combo.  But I am happy to really just look at it across the board so as not to be too restricted.

Thanks for your input!

James 

tesseract

Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #1 on: 28 Aug 2011, 09:22 pm »
How about a passive pre?

I really like my Exposure 2010S passive pre integrated. Because it is an all in one solution, there is no problems with amp/preamp sensitivity/compatibility.

cloudbaseracer

Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #2 on: 29 Aug 2011, 10:44 pm »
Are you saying passive pres have improved the most over the last few years?   :scratch:

Come on guys!  I know you are all veterans, knowledgeable and maybe just a little opinionated  :icon_lol:.  You must have some views as to the value of current equipment to an equivelently priced used "reference" piece of some 5-10 years ago?

Say a $2000 amplifier now compared to one that sold 7 years ago for $8,000 but now can possibly be purchased for the same $2000? 

Thanks,

James

Tyson

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 11174
  • Audio - It's all a big fake.
Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #3 on: 29 Aug 2011, 11:07 pm »
IMO, it depends on your speakers.  If you have difficult to drive speakers, then a very robust amp is where you should focus.  If you have relatively easy to drive speakers, then the amp is less critical and the focus should be on the preamp. 

As for general trends in improvements, there's nothing new under the sun.  Good amps from a decade ago are just as good as the amps being made today.  Unless you are talking about digital amps, which have improved a lot, but mainly because they sucked so bad initially.

timind

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3849
  • permanent vacation
Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #4 on: 29 Aug 2011, 11:33 pm »
I do not mind buying all of the gear used so as long as the gear is well made I should be fine. Is a GREAT amp from 5-10 years ago just as good as what is currently available new but just doesn't have the appeal or new bling?  What about a pre-amp that was all the rage a few years back?  Is it clearly bested by a new one at the same price of that older used model?  Does the trickle down technology really work?  Is it more prevalent on the pre-amp side or the amp side?  Or, do you feel that they have both progressed at the same rate? Is it just different now but not really noticeably better?


Thanks for your input!

James

Remember with 15-20 years you have wear and tear on the amp. The power supply caps are nearing the end of their expected life cycle and heat will have taken it's toll on many other components. That being said, with the exception of class D technology, the technology required to amplify an audio signal to drive a speaker hasn't changed much at all.
A lot of what's new, IMO, is just audio jewelry. It looks nice but doesn't really improve sound quality. 
I prefer a quality integrated amp for my system. It suits my audio needs and I enjoy simplicity.

cloudbaseracer

Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #5 on: 30 Aug 2011, 02:34 am »
Timind,

You make some good points about the age and degradation of older equipment.  I am aware of that but did not mention it although I should have.  This would have clarified a bit more what I am trying to understand.

Tyson,

Lets take the speakers and their requirements out of the picture.  Irrespective of the speaker load - is a $1500 new pre-amp of today every bit as good as a $6000 unit from the past?  I hear you about nothing new under the sun, I am curious if the technology and sound that was reserved for the "reference" gear from the past still has that high cost of entry?

I guess I am hoping that, for the most part, someone can spend a fraction of what was required in the past and get top tier sound.  Another way to ask, how much "better" does a $6000 amp or pre-amp from the past sound than a current $1500 unit? Is there any advantage sound wise to the older unit? 

Does a Stereophile Recommended Components Class A piece of equipment from the past still compete in Class A or is it more commensurate with something lower?


timind

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3849
  • permanent vacation
Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #6 on: 30 Aug 2011, 11:18 am »


Does a Stereophile Recommended Components Class A piece of equipment from the past still compete in Class A or is it more commensurate with something lower?


Interesting question. My answer is ABSOLUTELY!
In another thread I read differing opinions on the cost of a serious system. Opinions seemed to state the minimum cost is between $3K and $10K. This made me think I wasn't there. Then it dawned on me, if we're talking MSRP, I'm way past the threshold.

Photon46

Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #7 on: 30 Aug 2011, 12:06 pm »
If you are to believe what engineers and designers working in the audio business tell us, no one's reinvented the wheel. I recall Music Reference's Roger Modjeski writing on this topic some time ago. What does change is the implementation of circuits, parts quality, and manufacturing technologies. Companies like Cambridge Audio, Cayin, etc. design a product in Europe and get it manufactured in China to give more bang for the buck to the consumer. Politics and social consequences of this modus operandi aside, it is one strategy for carving out a niche of perceived value. What is changing much more than amp and preamps is speaker design. That is a product category where we are seeing better and better sounding products for the money. Again, Chinese manufacture is a factor is this "value" equation for many brands. One factor to consider in purchase of new vs. used is risk of loss of product function should the item require repair. I've bought audio gear for over forty years and this stuff does break. Many transistors, capacitors, etc. used in the past are no longer made and are nearly unobtanium. I research everything I consider buying used and weigh this in my decisions. Makes the prospect of buying something like used Audio Research less of a worry than what I own now, Italian Aloia. :lol: FWIW, I took a chance of this brand because I liked the sound of it so much and it has been extraordinarily well built and trouble free to this point.

Cheeseboy

Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #8 on: 31 Aug 2011, 09:49 pm »
Here are the used Line Stage pre amps on my shopping list.  De Havilland Ultra Verve 3 with remote.  I saw one on Audiogon for $1200.  I bet you could swing a deal on new.  Dodd Battery Linestage Preamp (not to be confused with the Passive Line Stage) with remote. I have seen as low as $1700 used.  Conrad Johnson Premier LS17 Linestage with remote.  I have seen as low as $2200 used.  Each of these has thier own sound.  You could google and find many reveiws. 


macrojack

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 3826
Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #9 on: 31 Aug 2011, 10:43 pm »
I'm currently awaiting delivery on this integrated. You will have a hard time beating this deal, new or used. They have more, by the way, I did not get the only one.

http://show.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/st.pl?intatran&1280436604&item&Hifiheaven2002&4&5&6&http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/srch_fs.plQQANYAAKEYWAApurlsrchAAEXYAAst26AAAAyamaha

nicksgem10s

Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #10 on: 1 Sep 2011, 12:13 am »
I believe preamps have improved the most because I have found that I favor the benefits that the newest group of ldr based volume controls provide.

I have used several but feel that I am very lucky to have the Warpspeed volume control in my system.

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=97379.0

I have gone through a ton of expensive passive and active preamps over the last ten years.

I would not trade the Warpspeed for the most expensive preamps I have owned in the past.

This is not to say that I do not think amps have also improved. 

I am a big fan of what Nelson Pass has been doing with his First Watt designs.  Incredibly smart designs that sound amazing.

You have some high efficiency speakers which really opens the door to trying out some great sounding combinations and not just high powered amplifier designs.

Nice speaker choice by the way!  I have heard and enjoyed the Summas at Dr. Geddes home a few years back.

Nick




S Clark

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 7377
  • a riot is the language of the unheard- Dr. King
Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #11 on: 1 Sep 2011, 12:24 am »
Here are the used Line Stage pre amps on my shopping list.  De Havilland Ultra Verve 3 with remote.  I saw one on Audiogon for $1200.  I bet you could swing a deal on new.  Dodd Battery Linestage Preamp (not to be confused with the Passive Line Stage) with remote. I have seen as low as $1700 used.  Conrad Johnson Premier LS17 Linestage with remote.  I have seen as low as $2200 used.  Each of these has thier own sound.  You could google and find many reveiws.
As far as the "Nothing new under the sun" a practical battery powered tube preamp is new.  The Dodd battery pre for under $2K used is something new as far as black background is concerned.

rollo

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 5469
  • Rollo Audio Consulting -
Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #12 on: 1 Sep 2011, 03:35 pm »
  Radical and new Dave Bernings ZOTL circuit. How about no power trannie or any trannie for that matter.
 If you get a chance to hear one ya just might shit yourself. Not a dealer.


charles
SMA

Cheeseboy

Re: Amp Or Pre-AMP - Which Has Evolved/Improved The Most?
« Reply #13 on: 2 Sep 2011, 06:41 pm »
I'd say the improvements in stepped attenuation in the volume pot, new capacitor materials and battery powered designs there is plenty to talk about in preamps.   

Take a trip to your local dealer and take some home and put them in your system. 

Many different approaches offer you the fexibility to find one that blends into what you had in mind for your system.

Add the new tube designs and you have plenty to be happy for in the preamp world.  I favor the tubed pre with a solid state or hybrid designed amp system.