Creek - OBH-22 Remote Passive Preamp-anybody use this??

eclein · « **on:** 23 Jan 2011, 03:54 am »

My little tube amp is a treat but only has one input, I'm using my Grant Tube DAC-09 as DAC/pre-amp and its fine but having two or more inputs and a remote would be very nice.... so I'm curious about this little guy, its got a remote--thats a good thing, and its passive, passive, passive.....

werd-if this is worng circle bounce my ass out of here....

eclein · « **Reply #1 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 11:51 am »

....this is a high tech volume attenuator....no gain, works with light sensing things, its got a remote!!!! Nobody......

konut · « **Reply #2 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 02:13 pm »

I've been using its predicessor the OBH-12 for going on 15 years. As passive pres go its pretty much the least costly remote going. The original remote did not even last a year and the warranty replacement not much longer than that so I've been using a Harmony since. It does what it does with very little sonic signature of its own, no fuss or muss. Easy to hear the effect of cord changes in other parts of the system. As the Brits say, It works a treat!

timind · « **Reply #3 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 02:27 pm »

I also used the OBH-12 for a brief period. I was running it into a Portal Panache integrated that had no remote. I also heard no sonic impact with the Creek. In my case I did not own it long enough to have problems with the remote.

eclein · « **Reply #4 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 03:57 pm »

Thanks guys!!! Remotes anymore are cheap but I'll keep that in mind, its just me here and I'm pretty careful with stuff. I'm trying to get as pure a signal as possible because this amp just sounds so good and with a clean signal its perfect for me here....I haven't even started rolling in any other tubes than the stock ones. Thanks again..

srb · « **Reply #5 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 04:25 pm »

Quote from: eclein on 23 Jan 2011, 11:51 am

....this is a high tech volume attenuator....no gain, works with light sensing things, its got a remote!!!!

As far as I can tell this is an updated version of the OBH-12 that still uses a motor driven potentiometer for attenuation and does not use LDRs (Light Dependent Resistors) like the Lightspeed, Lighter Note or others. The only "light sensing" hardware I can see is the use of an IR remote control.

Steve

Scott F. · « **Reply #6 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 04:42 pm »

Hi Ed,

To add to konut and timind, I used one (OBH 10) for several years and still own it. Overall its a nice little unit. Its sonic intrusion is fairly minimal though there is one. In my estimation, the sonic impact is no different than any other potentiometer based volume control. It looks like the new version (OBH22) uses an Alps Blue Velvet pot. That's not a bad sounding little pot.

eclein · « **Reply #7 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 04:45 pm »

http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CKOBH22

Steve it is kinda vague isn't it...." a built in micro processor processes the signal only when you give it a command using the remote control."

The lighter note guy told me he is working on a device with multiple inputs, but off in the future....
I could just switch cables, its pricey for basically a switch but the others I've seen are out of my range....its got the cute factor, I like small gadgets......

srb · « **Reply #8 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 04:52 pm »

Quote from: eclein on 23 Jan 2011, 04:45 pm

Steve it is kinda vague isn't it...." a built in micro processor processes the signal only when you give it a command using the remote control."

Yes, what they're saying is (per the Creek literature) "After each [remote] operation, the micro-controller turns itself off to avoid any possibility of interfering with the main music signal."

You got me excited for a minute there, thinking this might be a new entry into the remote-controlled multi-input LDR passive arena from a mainstream manufacturer.

Steve

doug s. · « **Reply #9 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 05:20 pm »

my understanding is the 22 is the exact same as the 12, cosmetics (and price) aside. extremely little (if any) sonic degradation w/my 12, imo. and i never had any remote issues, tho i only used it for ~2 years.

however, for the same price, or less, i would strongly recommend the eva-2 ldr attenuator - this sucker actually improved my sound, by enabling me to run the (already wery transparent) melos tube pot in my highly modded ma333r wide open. the eva-2 is the real deal, imo... 3 remote-control inputs, remote wolume... and yes - ldr

http://diyparadise.com/shop/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=18

doug s.

eclein · « **Reply #10 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 05:23 pm »

I can live with the DAC in the DUET and the CD player gets most of the use honestly anyway. When I hooked up just the CD player or just the DUET to the amp the signal was so clean and crisp it made me think...which is a questionable activity!
Its got a "remote"!!!!

The Tube DAC-09 is fine, great performer, lots of options, I'm not going to abandon that piece... at least I wasn't until I just read dougs post.

konut · « **Reply #11 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 06:15 pm »

In the interest of full disclosure it occured to me that the fact that for the time that I owned the 2 original remotes I was living only 50 yards from the ocean (

) might have something to do with their short longevity. I have been lusting to upgade to the Eva 2.

srb · « **Reply #12 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 06:24 pm »

Quote from: doug s. on 23 Jan 2011, 05:20 pm

however, for the same price, or less, i would strongly recommend the eva-2 ldr attenuator

I see that $468 SGD is ~ $364 US. What kind of shipping charges and other fees (if any) are involved shipping from Kuala Lumpur?

Steve

doug s. · « **Reply #13 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 07:20 pm »

Quote from: srb on 23 Jan 2011, 06:24 pm

I see that $468 SGD is ~ $364 US. What kind of shipping charges and other fees (if any) are involved shipping from Kuala Lumpur?

Steve

my cost was $506sgd shipped ($394.19usd). i really wanted the original eva, as i was interested in only one source, since i am using this between amp(s) and pre, but they said they're no longer making that one...

doug s.

eclein · « **Reply #14 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 07:31 pm »

Doug- What kind of turnaround time did it take from order to the door???
I'm curious...

doug s. · « **Reply #15 on:** 23 Jan 2011, 07:52 pm »

Quote from: eclein on 23 Jan 2011, 07:31 pm

Doug- What kind of turnaround time did it take from order to the door???
I'm curious...

it was about 7-10 days; i do not remember exactly...

doug s.