Clio09, I had the opportunity to compare the Lightspeed against one of our own preamps and I have to say it was the most neutral passive I have heard.
Like any passive I have heard, it had less bass impact than the preamp, which as I have already mentioned is mathematically unavoidable with a passive if you have a coupling capacitor at the output of the source (in this case a DAC). I contest the idea that *all* switches will have issues relative to a light-activated device (my concern would be the linearity of the light activated device...); obviously in practice both can be quite good.
FWIW the Shallco uses gold contacts, with a double-spring-loaded wiper.
However the preamp in this comparison had not only the Shallco switch (custom-built) but a stage of gain, a set of coupling caps and then a direct-coupled vacuum-tube buffer. It was also driving 24 feet of cable, where the passive was driving 3 feet. The two were gain-matched to avoid Fletcher-Munson errors.
The big difference was in the bass as I mentioned. If you go with the idea that the preamp was hampered by its active circuits, then the idea that its volume control is audibly inferior falls apart.
Its my contention that one of the biggest failings of many tube line stages is the coupling cap found at their outputs, so we found a simple way to get rid of it in out designs. Apparently, that is a bigger deal than I had thought.
Like any passive I have heard, it had less bass impact than the preamp, which as I have already mentioned is mathematically unavoidable with a passive if you have a coupling capacitor at the output of the source (in this case a DAC). I contest the idea that *all* switches will have issues relative to a light-activated device (my concern would be the linearity of the light activated device...); obviously in practice both can be quite good.
FWIW the Shallco uses gold contacts, with a double-spring-loaded wiper.
However the preamp in this comparison had not only the Shallco switch (custom-built) but a stage of gain, a set of coupling caps and then a direct-coupled vacuum-tube buffer. It was also driving 24 feet of cable, where the passive was driving 3 feet. The two were gain-matched to avoid Fletcher-Munson errors.
The big difference was in the bass as I mentioned. If you go with the idea that the preamp was hampered by its active circuits, then the idea that its volume control is audibly inferior falls apart.
Its my contention that one of the biggest failings of many tube line stages is the coupling cap found at their outputs, so we found a simple way to get rid of it in out designs. Apparently, that is a bigger deal than I had thought.