[medium jim]

...and don't skimp on the power supply, like with most else in audio.

Very true!

Jim

[bummrush]

Principals and musical appreciation don't often go together.

[SteveFord]

Yes, amps make a significant difference but not as much as the preamp can which is why they're so important.

[Goosepond]

No one is talking about the primary benefit of a passive pre: it doesn't have a power cord! 

Gene

[medium jim]

It is too bad that this became a pissing contest. Here's a novel thought, choose a preamp that sounds the best for your ears. More important, don't piddle on others and we can all enjoy the music.

Jim

[doug s.]

Nothing can mess with a system more than a pre amp. But really the source is what you hear. Everything your hear through your speakers is the source amplified.  At the end of the day pre amps are just tweaks off the source.

by the same token, nothing can make a system have that "it's real music" essence more than a preamp.  the preamp is easily the single most important piece of electronics in the equipment chain, when it comes to the illusion of creating live music in the home.  at the end of the day preamps are what brings life (or death?) to the extremely small fragile signals generated from the source.  make mine active, thank you very much.   

give me a good active preamp, and it will make any quality source have life.  even tho i might prefer one particular source over the other.  w/o a quality preamp, all the sources will be lacking.  as sj david mentioned, before the sound ever escapes the speakers in your listening room, the signal has been thru a myriad of stages.  there's no way i'm gonna compromise the single-most important one - that which amplifies the fragile source signal - all in the misguided attempt to remove one piece of electronics out of a chain of many.

and a note to c-j and all your audiophile friends who approve of your system: make sure you don't ever audition a quality active preamp.  because you will wonder why you have been missing all the great music all this time, or you will have to spend the rest of your days in denial.   

doug s.

[doug s.]

It is too bad that this became a pissing contest. Here's a novel thought, choose a preamp that sounds the best for your ears. More important, don't piddle on others and we can all enjoy the music.

Jim

hey!  i can piss...  oh, never mind!   

i agree - choose what sounds best to you.  in my system, it happens to be an active pre, w/its gain max'd, and wolume level controlled by an ldr passive remote.  one added component in the chain and it sounds better.  go figure...

doug s.

[roscoeiii]

c-J,

Come on over with the passive of your choice and we can compare its effect with a digital source to the sound with my kW preamp in the chain. We will then see about "ruining" music vs making it better.

Like any audio component, preamps differ in their strengths and emphasis. Neither ruins the sound.

More than anything else, AXPONA the past week convinced me of the importance of hearing components in your own system.

I am also very curious what active preamps you have heard and what passive preamps you have heard.

Actives (especially low priced ones) have tradeoffs. Just as passives (especially low priced ones) do. The more you move up the price ladder, the fewer tradeoffs need to be made. Again, like with most audio components.

[G Georgopoulos]

The "gain" is from the amp built in the programme source, e.g. most, if not all, CD players is rated 2V rms/600R O/P impedance. 2V rms is enough to drive most most, if not all, power amps to their rated full O/P power.

So any more "gain" from the preamp is redundant. A properly design/built passive linestage will do a BETTER job as it does NOT generate any undue distortion & noise onto the music signals that pass thru.

Don't you know any active stages are distortion & noise generators?? They can only ruin the music instead making it better.

c-J

Hi c-j,excellent points...,tho I'm not against preamps (active or passive)...

kind regards 

[roscoeiii]

See earlier this thread c-J, my active preamp is a Musical Fidelity kW.

You can see Fremer's Stereophile review for details on it.

[werd]

The "gain" is from the amp built in the programme source, e.g. most, if not all, CD players is rated 2V rms/600R O/P impedance. 2V rms is enough to drive most most, if not all, power amps to their rated full O/P power.

So any more "gain" from the preamp is redundant. A properly design/built passive linestage will do a BETTER job as it does NOT generate any undue distortion & noise onto the music signals that pass thru.

Don't you know any active stages are distortion & noise generators?? They can only ruin the music instead making it better.

c-J

ok,so what is your system gain?

[tabrink]

Brett,
 I am so much in agreement with you,' 
This is Franks AVA Circle and the best parts of my modest ( I work for a charity) system are AVA. I have a passive pre until I can save up for an AVA active pre. Been missing a bunch of neat AVA stuff since being restricted on the buy and sell but maybe that is good..
And yes  I have a a bit  to my learning curve on active pre and nobody famous has let me listen to their system (but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night) so your insight is refreshing. Hope this gets approved and posted as you nailed it.
Tom

   That's a classic audio poser technique, this sort of thing is what drives most of the "high end" industry. People bragging about how much everything costs, who they know in the industry, etc. It stems from basic insecurity an terror that someone will find out they don't know what they are talking about, or that everything their golden ear hears is psychosomatic.

    I am in this forum because there is relatively little of this BS that comes in here. How anyone with a lick of sense to read this sort of nonsense on a regular basis is beyond me.

    Brett

[rollo]

My preamp experience has been with both active and passive.  If anyone remembers I was hot and heavy over the Promitheus Trannie based passive. Was so smitten in fact went to Malaysia to form a partnership with Promitheus which unfortunately turned sour.
     anyway during that time and after, a Stevens & Billington, Bent, Mapleshade all were auditioned to compare to the Promitheus. The winner was the S&B hands down. Then Uriahs LDR based passive graced our doorstep. That babie was equal to the S&B but lacked the weight of the S&B which was not much to begin with. However more weight than all other contenders.
      The clear advantage of any of the passives was the clarity and openness of the sound. A clear advantage over most actives. Air, decay of notes and harmonics appeared in spades. Bu but something was missing.
     Gestalt is the only word I can use to describe what was MIA with all passives we tried in direct comparison to the actives.  Where we found the passive to be almost equal was when a darker richer system was being used. The passives shined. With say a brighter system they were tiring.
    The active BTW a Loesch & Weisner [ tubed ] and Miracle Audio [ SS] were used for comparisons. Non of the passives could equal in direct comparison of the weight and body of the actives. Nor could the actives reach the see through presentation of the passives. 
    Trade offs for both. However IMO the actives were more engaging and got more emotion going than any of the passives.  Both have merit. In our experience using a passive with tubed gear over SS was an advantage but not for all.
     Remember - ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL.



charles

[jackman]

Rollo,
Excellent post.  I'm not sure if the difference is distortion related but IMO a well designed active preamp just sounds more like real music to me.  Passive preamps have their strengths but they lack the body and depth of a good active.  I can't put my finger on it because unwanted to like the passive preamp.  None of the passive preamps, including a highly regarded LDR passive sounded as good to me as a good active like the SAS 10a. 

Passives are dead quiet, and I understand the allure.  It might just come down to personal preference.  I think it's cool to have options and I'm always willing to try them.  Passives are usually more cost effective but they just don't sound as good to me. 

CJ - you conveniently cherry picked Rollo's post.  You skipped the part that said something was missing from passive preamps.  This is my experience as well. None that I've tried sound like real music to me.  That is a deal breaker.  Maybe you are just too cheap to buy a good active and are deluding yourself into thinking passives are better sounding or maybe you just like a listening to music that lacks body and realism.

Jack 

[rollo]

  There was as well a continuance of sound with the passives. My preference were the transformer based or Slagle Autoformers over the resistor based contenders.
  The LDR model had the most see through quality of all contenders. As much as the passives did at creating clarity and detail, there was something amiss. Sheer slam and grunt were MIA with the passives.
   When at Carnegie hall the Orchestra has slam and power. Only the actives were able to remind me of that. To say anything has the slam and power of a live orchestra would be BS. Drum kits as well. Here trade offs again. While the decay of the cymbals was better defined by the passive. Rim shots and the snare were  more lifelike.  Tradeoff. Decay of cymbals was longer and more closer to real with the passive. However the tonality with the active was more closer to reality.
    Horns with the passive were fatiguing. Just thin sounding. Now horns when produced correctly are brash, shrill and bright and quite dynamic. The active was just more involving.
    Try both passive and active. The only way to tell.  My take anyway.


charles

[jackman]

  There was as well a continuance of sound with the passives. My preference were the transformer based or Slagle Autoformers over the resistor based contenders.
  The LDR model had the most see through quality of all contenders. As much as the passives did at creating clarity and detail, there was something amiss. Sheer slam and grunt were MIA with the passives.
   When at Carnegie hall the Orchestra has slam and power. Only the actives were able to remind me of that. To say anything has the slam and power of a live orchestra would be BS. Drum kits as well. Here trade offs again. While the decay of the cymbals was better defined by the passive. Rim shots and the snare were  more lifelike.  Tradeoff. Decay of cymbals was longer and more closer to real with the passive. However the tonality with the active was more closer to reality.
    Horns with the passive were fatiguing. Just thin sounding. Now horns when produced correctly are brash, shrill and bright and quite dynamic. The active was just more involving.
    Try both passive and active. The only way to tell.  My take anyway.


charles

Another excellent post.  On acoustic music, like a guitar and singer, with no slam or weight to the music, actives (LDR in my experience) are excellent.  They are very transparent and silent.  Passives have well documented strengths as well as weaknesses.  It all comes down to personal preference and tradeoffs or music preference.  I've never heard the Slagle Autoformers but I've heard very good things and have been lurking at the Slagle site.   I hope to hear these sometime in my system. 

Cheers,

Jack

[roscoeiii]

c-J,

I see 1-2 live shows a week. I know what live music sounds like, acoustic and otherwise.

If you distrust reviewers, then at least Stereophile provides measurements that you can examine. And you will see that the kW measures extremely well. Well enough for me to doubt your claim that what an active preamp adds is necessarily sonic colorations (I will stay away from scary bold test). Not that there aren't sonic colorations in many preamps.

What I object to most is your insistence that the benefits some of us hear from an active preamp must be due to "sonic colorations," along with your claim that an active "ruins" the sound (no active or passive has ever "ruined" the sound for me, but each had its own strengths and weaknesses). Not to mention your claim that others opinions must be uninformed due to lack of experience with live acoustic music, or due to some "inferior complex." I choose to come here to AC because the conversation is generally civil and the community supportive. Please help us keep it this way by not casting aspersions towards other members' POVs. 

As Rollo suggested: "ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL."

[doug s.]

...What I object to most is your insistence that the benefits some of us hear from an active preamp must be due to "sonic colorations," along with your claim that an active "ruins" the sound (no active or passive has ever "ruined" the sound for me, but each had its own strengths and weaknesses). Not to mention your claim that others opinions must be uninformed due to lack of experience with live acoustic music, or due to some "inferior complex." I choose to come here to AC because the conversation is generally civil and the community supportive. Please help us keep it this way by not casting aspersions towards other members' POVs. 

As Rollo suggested: "ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL."

+1! 

the fact is that all recorded music is not the real thing, and no matter how it is reproduced, it is a copy - an illusion.  everything about it is a "colouration"!   so, who cares if if an active preamp imparts "sonic colouration"?  in this context, it is meaningless.  what if an active preamp imparts something to the recording that makes it seem more like the real thing - live music?  even tho it may be less true to the recording itself, less accurate on paper?  which is correct?  i know which i think is correct...   

doug s.

[rollo]

  Actually a live event can sound colored. Ever been to Lincoln center before the last renovation. Bright bright and more bright. Never would we go there for a violin concert.
  The Bottom line was a rich room colored. So if one wants to try and recreate as close as possible to those rooms the sound must be altered [ colored ] to recreate that.     
    when Carnegie Hal was redone the contractor decided to remove the bedding for the wood sleepers that support the floor. the cinder ashes were removed and concrete was installed instead of replacing cinders. The hall lost its natural character. Both conductors and musicians complained and the cinder was put back. Since Carnegie has retained its house sound.
    So the room is key as well in recreating or creating great sound. just to many factors to determine the real culprit in reproduction. Since it is a recreatio then adding color just may be the ticket for some.
     My bet little if any actually have experienced a recording session. Listening to the live feed agaisnt the recorded feed is mind boggling. Listened to both digital and analog feeds. Both were close but no cigar until the engineer did his thing. Added this added that took away this and added this. A boost here a boost there. At the end of the day the recorded music was very close but again no cigar.
   Our brain can be fooled with tone but not with phase. both in phase and more importantly out of phase signals are key when right to recorded music. Shoot man if we could not process out of phase info we would not know to run away or to the roaring Lion.
    Electronics due to there cancel out phase ya know plus one and minus one equal zero. To me that is the biggest difference between live and recorded sound.


charles

[jackman]

CJ - I'm not going to argue with you or state how often I get to live shows.  We all have our preferences and if you feel passives are closer to live music, more power to you.  It's cool that you found a system that meets your needs.   To be completely honest, or frank, after hearing a good live show in a venue with great acoustics, it's hard for me to listen to any system.  Even the big buck systems at Axpona and at my local B&M stores or friends' homes.  Amplified Rock music is different.  I've been to too many shows (at Soldier Field, United Center, Allstate Arena, etc.) that sounded much worse than most home systems.  Even home systems with passive preamps!

We are all trying to get as close as possible (or as close as our budgets and rooms will allow), and everyone has different preferences and opinions regarding what sounds "real".   Passive preamps have strengths, but I can't live with their weaknesses. 

 I noticed you didn't respond to Frank VA's offer.  Afraid of what he might find?  
Cheers,

Jack