Do I even need or want a preamp?

You have just discribed what some 'philes may not now, or may not ever, experience. That is a "synergy" within your audio system. If you would like to add another source or would like to correct the details in the sonic field and/or add multiple function, then you need a pre-amp. Since your sound is about dead on, I would suggest a fairly cheap way of addressing the pre-mp issue. The use of a "high quality" Passive pre-amp may suit your needs. I use a McCormack TLC-1 that sells (usually) for under 500.00. It is transparent and detailed my system. There quite a few others, as well, that range from about 500.00 to 2000.00 new (and of course, less used). All of them (that I know of) have had good reviews.

Tubby

I will second the passive preamp route. I am using a Reference Line 1A with Atma-sphere M-60 MKIII amps. It has been the single biggest improvement in the system since the Atma-Spheres. It brought out detail, imaging and richness in my Silverline Sonatas I have never experienced. It bested a Sonic Frontiers and a Cary in my system.

I'll try to answer everyone in one post. I used a broken in pair of Tara Labs Air1 balanced interconnects from the preamp to the Levinson which, I assume, are similar to the Air2 interconnects in sonic qualities. The BAT was also well broken in prior to the dealer lending it to me.

I only had the BAT in my system last night. I would go from direct in from the player to the amp, and would then put the preamp in the middle. I could keep it for a few days, but I seriously doubt that the dealer would allow a 30 day trial! Even if I could keep it for more than about a week, it didn't take long to notice that there wasn't much difference between having the preamp in the signal path and not having it there. Both my son and I thought that the bass response was a bit tighter, and that there was something present in the way of more cohesion.....but both of these were certainly mild, if they weren't the result of a "placebo effect". We both also thought that there was a bit of harshness that wasn't present without the preamp.

As I see it, the preamp provided a volume boost that I doubt I needed. I have never had to have the Accuphase at full volume. I truly didn't know what to expect. Logic says that I should have expected more volume and a slight degradation of sound that one might expect from adding one more set of int3erconnects and another piece of gear in the signal path. That IS what I seem to have gotten! Somehow, I had a hope that a preamp might do something "magical". It sounds silly as I look at what I just wrote, but I am just being honest about my expectations. As best I see it, perhaps I would be better off getting a better pair of interconnects and speaker cables than to buy a preamp. If I'm missing something in my thinking, I'm glad to know about it!

I'm now passive for a couple of years and won't go back. Not everyone can do this as you need beefy low impedence sources and sensative hi Z amplification. Sounds like your fine w/o

ET

Yea, I agree with Electroid. Since you are not really adding another source, nor do you need to alter the signal, you may be better off just where you are (w/o a pre-amp... passive or not). I think that you may have found your "magic", or perhaps the need to visit a small audio salon in Mugwart. Talk to Dynacovia, the Gypsy lady (with the one softly glowing green eye).

Tubby.