Lightspeed Attenuator - Best Preamp Ever?
You can get them pretty cheap, but if you're concerned about sound degradation Decware makes one for $119. Thanks, Clio. I might just go ahead and get that Decware, as my wife likes to use the system to watch her Korean dramas :). The IC's look promising as well. Also, are you suggesting that the Decware would not lead to any degradation or that it would tend to minimize it, given its quality? I don't know anything about how switchers work. regards. |
As for having my own Lightspeed Attenuator forum Tsciame, it would be nice, but I would have to maintain it, moderate it as well, and I'm flat out building them, it's nice when I have a break in orders to go down and have a surf at the beach come back refreshed and get stuck into it again. A smart man would sell it all off to someone in China, then one could surf all day, but then who said surfers were smart? Cheers George |
Banquo363, Steve builds quality products at great prices. I'd be surprised if you could hear a difference using his input selector. He uses quality parts and backs it up with a 30 day trial (stock units, not custom orders). I was pleasantly surprised with the interconnects. I've tried one of his phono stages in the past as well and would love to try his speakers some day. I'm not the best customer he has, far from it in fact, but if I call and talk to him he will spend whatever time he has to with me. Great person to deal with. Tell him what you're going to use the input selector for and he'll shoot straight with you. |
I have one comment or concern that I see in this otherwise great thread. It seems when one person has a different experience or opinion on this preamp their comments are dismissed and marginalized very quickly by some. The reason must be system match or how the amp was made etc…but rarely is it simply accepted that another actually preferred the other preamp in a side by side test. I can tell you the Samson amps by TRL do have the input impedance spec mentioned already. I can tell you I tried the Lightspeed with Atmasphere Ma1’s that have an input impedance of 100K ohms. My comments match those of Knghifi very closely. Our fine tube units simply performed better to our ears with no other reason than our own ears and likes. This is OK right? The Lightspeed is also a good preamp, but won’t win every a/b shootout right? Your thoughts? |
This is OK right? The Lightspeed is also a good preamp, but won’t win every a/b shootout right? Of course it's okay and I wouldn't expect it to win every shootout. The fact it can favorably compete with preamps that cost at a minimum 10x as much and in Knghifi's case significantly more is an extremely positive statement all by itself. Let's not forget that it beat out some great preamps too. Just for the record, it's been stated numerous times in this thread that certain conditions must exist in order for the LSA to work optimally. I don't see any harm in questioning whether those conditions existed. It's critical to ensuring the LSA was evaluated properly. Assuming it was, and both Knghifi and I both verified as much by indicating the proper specs for the amp, then you're right, it comes down to preference. |
Who dismissed Knghfi's observation? But asking whether or not there was a good impedance match is a valid question given the problems any unbuffered passive would have without a good impedance match (and short cables, and high sensitivity amps for best perfromance). Not sure any one suggested that he does not prefer his VAC to the LSA, it is one of the finest tube linestages available, so why doubt it? The fact that someone accustomed to such a high quality linestage would be willing to use the LSA on hot months, speaks well enough for the LSA in my view. What I would say is that for $450, anyone following this thread should give the thing a try and decide for themselves, but I certainly respect any listener's preferences and observations. |
Clio09 mentioned that "Paul Weitzel told me he does not like FETs or MOSFET" so all I said was "being the Samson is all solid state, that if it's not fet or mosfet input it would have to be bipolar", and any tech will tell you that it's highly unlikely to be 100k input impedance with bi-polars on the input stage. Look at any bipolar input amp, most are below 47k usually 10k to 30k, as dc offset problem arise if higher than this with an open circuit input. Cheers George |
Clio09 is certainly most open minded and fair. Pubul57 has also been fair. I suppose the builder is the one I was thinking about. I was careful in my post not to point the finger at all. Good little preamp and has gone head to head and won some impressive battles against great preamps. I think my post does reflect truth based on reading this thread. I just wanted to bring out a concern and understand not all are quick to cry "foul" when the Lspeed is not champion. I have read about the conditions that must be met and when they are and the Lspeed shows well, but does not win, the comments about bad synergy still come. George, you still question the input impedance on the Samson amp and still say NO. Oh well. My point exactly. |
What I understood from George's comments based on his experience was that bipolar designed circuits would not typically have a 100k input impedance and many examples of this design had less than the 47k ohm the LSA requires, in some cases significantly less. Could it be possible to design a circuit using bipolar transistors that is an exception? Obviously the answer is yes assuming the Samson specs are accurate and I have no reason to believe they are not. I'm basically accepting the designers statements at face value since I don't have the amp myself to take a measurement and lack the necessary experience to refute the claim. In somewhat of an analogy Roger Modjeski wrote an application for an EL-84 circuit that gets at least twice as much power than others have been able to achieve using the standard circuits published in books. So perhaps this is a new twist on a standard design that allows for a higher than normal input impedance. The only people who can actually tell us are the designer or an owner who has the ability take a proper measurement. Personally its hardly worth the trouble. |
Quit your whining. Virtually every thread on Audiogon displays this type of "mine is the best because I own it or I built it" post. Why are you so surprised it happened here. And the posters in this thread have certainly not been cheerleading the LSA any more than you do TRL products. Does this sound familiar, "TRL ST-225 is the best I have owned. No remote however. It absolutely opened up my music collection like no other high end piece of gear I have ever heard. An utter and complete step beyond anything I have heard regardless of price. I cannot imagine a better sounding set-up. If so, I want it yesterday!" And this is just one example. |
Fiddler, I am not whining at all but making a reasonable point. Sorry you are upset. I am not talking about cheerleading at all and want to hear it when someone has found a great piece. Seems I am being attacked for no real reason by you. That is to bad, as I simply tried to broaden the scope of discussion by pointing a real tendency to "blow off" comments by some based on the general "bad synergy" catch all. This has not been done by all, but by some. It happened to me and Knghifi when we reported our findings in an open and honest manner. Both our amps were well over 47k and we used a digital source with plenty of output. My comments have nothing to do with "mine is best" but points out that some have had good synergy and while liking the Lspeed preferred their current preamp. You can quote my gear praises all day if you like, but you are off point. I am talking about honest dialogue here and not about product cheerleading. I would have not posted a thing if the builder did not quickly run to the catch all "bad synergy" comment on Knghifi's Samson amp. According to the amp's spec it is indeed good synergy. I simply want accurate and productive discussion that is open to the facts. I have stated and state again that the Lspeed is a wonderful buy and a great value. I am not trying to hurt it's reputation or upset owners. Seems my point is clear and I am sorry if you misunderstand. |
Two months ago, a friend loaned me his LSA as I was curious and wanted to do a shootout between it and the TRL Dude. Like King, I also own the Samson monoblocks. The critical "Heather test' was performed (blindfolded wife + one glass of wine as a bribe). It is an even more sensitive test than the beloved Bolero test George referenced. Result: Dude. It was not close. I live in Charlotte, NC, which gets toasty during the summer, but the Dude does not heat up the room that much, so I am not in need of a cool running SS pre. I am glad King and Pubul57 can use the LSA in that capacity. I guess the real question now is the validity of George's statements above about bipolar resistors and the Samsons. From what Paul Weitzel has told me in the past, the Samsons possess higher impedance and gain than most amps and thus should be perfect for evaluation of a passive unit like the LSA. |
"Seems I am being attacked for no real reason by you." "This has not been done by all, but by some. It happened to me and Knghifi when we reported our findings in an open and honest manner." Sure sounds like whining to me. This is a typical Audiogon exchange seen here everyday where owners or designers defend their equipment, legitimate or not. And I don't see anyone being attacked in this thread. The closest thing I see to someone attacking another person is you attacking Georgelofi. Georgelofi simply asked a legitimate design question relative to synergy with the TRL and you got your panties in a wad. Apparently Georgelofi isn't entitled to question a TRL product or its specs because as we know, the TRL is, ""An utter and complete step beyond anything (you) have heard regardless of price." Maybe if TRL was more forthcoming on their website with some specs other than a picture and a price, we wouldn't be having this conversation. |
I am talking about honest dialogue here and not about product cheerleading. I would have not posted a thing if the builder did not quickly run to the catch all "bad synergy" comment on Knghifi's Samson amp. According to the amp's spec it is indeed good synergy. I simply want accurate and productive discussion that is open to the facts. I think you're reaching on this one Bill. George was curious as to what the load was on the Samson. He couldn't find any specs and it's well known that TRL doesn't publish them. So all he had to go on was his experience. Here is what George actually said: One question Knghifi the poweramp TRL Samson you used for the comparison, it's a solid state amp and I have looked everywhere for it's input impedance and nowhere can I find it, as the Lightspeed Attenuator likes to see 47kohms or higher for the poweramp it's feeding. If the TRL is lower than this you have still not heard the Lightspeed at it's best, and heaven forbid it may beat out the VAC Signature if it sees an amp with the input at 47kohms or higher. Where's the cheerleading there? Where is the dishonest dialogue? Again, he indicated what has been said here and elsewhere about LSA requirements. Had the specs been published and he could of seen them I'm going to assume we wouldn't be having this conversation. He would have known right off the bat that the input impedance requirements were met. I don't see where Knghifi is being attacked (pretty strong word don't you think). As for you being attacked when reporting your findings IIRC correctly there was a lot of confusion in that dialogue regarding the definition of transparency. Yours being different than what others here including myself interpreted as the meaning. We all stated our opinions and preferences. Personally I found it a pretty interesting dialogue and it made me think about how I listen. This thread has had a pretty decent life. Sure it dies down but it always comes back. I think it's done a good job of opening up some peoples eyes as to what is possible sound wise for such little investment. As Fiddler indicated there is a fair amount of cheer leading in the forums, take for example the Supratek and Audio Horizons threads. Do you happen to recall these?: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?aamps&1142509250&openflup&2&4#2 http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?aamps&1016931418&openusid&zzGrannyring&4&5#Grannyring These are just the first posts I ran across. I'm surprised there isn't a "Dude best preamp" thread on here. Maybe there should be. If there was I'm sure we'd see our fair share of cheer leading, as well as a lot more controversy than what we've seen here based on past TRL threads I have read and participated in. Heck it probably would get deleted just like the last TRL thread on the digital forum. |
Let's just leave it at this. The LSA is pretty good, and "not bad" for the money. Give it a try and decide for yourself if it competes with the $$$$ gear, I think you might find the test interesting and well worth keeping even if you decide it does not better your $$$$ linestage, or, some of you just might sell your $$$$ linestage and spend the money elsewhere, including, possibly, more music:) Everyone, have a great New Year, I hope is 2011 is better for all of you. |
I just report what I (and several audiophile friends) hear and didn't felt I was attacked. But I do understand Grannyring point in Georges questioning of the Samson input impedance, which can be construded negatively, after it was confirmed by multiple sources it's well above 47kohm and my personal listening experiences eventhough I don't have golden ears. 3 more points: 1. My MW Transporter has the ability to drive amps directly so it has more than enough gain. 2. Liveline IC between LSA and Samson is 1M. 3. TRL Dude has a tube regulated power supply so it makes no sense for the Samson to have an input impedance below 30kohm. |
Fair enough Clio09. I agree with your thoughts and let’s move on. I and Knghifi were not attacked and I did overstate that a bit. Ya, I did purchase the preamps in the threads you posted. Liked them both. I will always tell the Agon community of gear I find to be awesome as time goes by. Please understand that one can reasonably take the comments of the Lightspeed builder as implying, if not directly stating, a match/impedance issue was present This is especially true when the owner gave the spec asked for and it was still questioned? That is the way I read it, but the Lightspeed builder may well be confused on the amp in question and really having trouble understanding how it has the spec confirmed by Knghifi. This is certainly possible. |
OK now here's the truth from the horses mouth, the Lightspeed was seeing a happy load and Grannyrig check your facts before you double swear it was 100k input. And as I said for it to be over 47k it would have to be Fet input. Below is Paul Weitzel email to me. Cheers George Hi George. Answers to your questions. 1. 68K ohms 2. FET input 3. DC coupled They have pretty normal specs. Take care. Paul TRL, Inc. tuberesearchlabs.com |
Georgelofi, I did check my facts. I said my Atmasphere MA1 amps were 100K? Please read above. I said Knghifi's Samson amps were over 47K and just as Knghifi stated - 68K. I never said the Samson amps were 100K. Not sure where you got that George. You simply confirmed what I, Agear and Knghifi have already said. |
12-30-10: Georgelofi Grannying was talking about his Atma-Sphere Ma-1 OTL Tube Amps in his LSA evaluation so his facts are correct. 12-30-10: Pubul57 All SS as far as I know :-) |
Georgelofi, I think you misread my comments and want to clarify for you. You stated; “Grannyrig check your facts before you double swear it was 100k input.” I actually said this; “I can tell you the Samson amps by TRL do have the input impedance spec mentioned already. I can tell you I tried the Lightspeed with Atmasphere Ma1’s that have an input impedance of 100K ohms” As you can see I said the Atmasphere amps had a 100K input impedance, not the Samsons. The input impedance that Knghifi mentioned was 68K and I referred to it. I and others simply stated it was higher then 47K. Hope this helps clarify. |
Apologies to Grannyrig, you did not state the Samson was 100k, I misread the statement you made, it was the Atmasphere you were eluding to. This has got a bit out of hand, because I had mentioned "was the Lightspeed seeing the ideal load". It was and was beaten out by the $14,000 VAC Signature MKIIa in Knghifi's setup, I wait for future posts Knghifi after the dust has settled and all has burnt in. Cheers George |
12-30-10: Clio09 Don't forget all the tubes :-) It's the law of diminishing returns ... in this case, the last 25% is well worth it. Last week had friend over that's familiar with my system pleaded with me no more changes. The system never sounded so good after rolling in some Tele 12au7 ribbed plates and 1960's Tele e88cc. I still want to roll some 1960 Siemen cca or e88cc and Paul is making me more goodies. Odds of a stock market correction is better but is tough to fight the fed printing $$. LSA is my 1st preamp without a remote for volume since my SF SFL 2 many moons ago. In serious listening I like to fine tune the volume on each track and it's a PITA without it. The last thing I need is more exercise :-) |
Since I had the Joule LA150 SE at the time I got the LSA, I wanted another good linestage to compare it with. So a buddy of mine who has the CAT SL1 Ultimate MKII came over with his unit (70lbs!) just to compare. Well we went through some Lester Young, the Mile Davis Quintet Live at the Plugged Nickel, and some 1960s folk music. The amp I was using was the incredible Music Reference RM10 MKII. Both preamps sounded wonderful. Could live with either. Let's say my friend was so impressed with the LSA that he is questioning whether to keep the CAT, not that it isn't wonderful, but.... What is the LSA does exceptionally well, where I really see it shine is how right it gets the timbre of instruments, wide and balanced frequency range (plenty of bass), and dynamics. I don't hear anything remotely like 2D sound staging, width, depth, and relative positioning (layering?) seems just about right. Perhaps it is simply getting out of the way and revealing with the RM10 can do - the combo may be a very, very good match. I previously owned the CAT pre and replaced it with the Joule, after getting a good A/B comparison I still have no qualms about the LSA and its merits. And when I take cost and tube rolling into account, well - I don't think I'll be changing "preamps" and time soon, excepth maybe ot get a dual volume control version of the LSA for channel balance control. I've not yet tried the LSA with my Atma-sphere amps because I have a lot of 6sn7s and 12au7s for my Atma-sphere preamp, and I'm not sure the M60s will be sensitive enough to go passive. But as I switch to the M60s tomorrow for the winter months, I might give LSA a trial with them. |
Perhaps it is simply getting out of the way and revealing with the RM10 can do - the combo may be a very, very good match. That's a big part of it, in addition to remaining true to the source. I've not yet tried the LSA with my Atma-sphere amps because I have a lot of 6sn7s and 12au7s for my Atma-sphere preamp, and I'm not sure the M60s will be sensitive enough to go passive. They are sensitive enough, trust me. What is the LSA does exceptionally well, where I really see it shine is how right it gets the timbre of instruments, wide and balanced frequency range (plenty of bass), and dynamics. I don't hear anything remotely like 2D sound staging, width, depth, and relative positioning (layering?) seems just about right. The designer of my speakers top priority was getting the reproduction of natural timbre right. Putting the LSA in the chain did nothing to disrupt the natural timbre being reproduced by my speakers. It's one of the reasons the LSA is a hit with me. I agree on the other comments as well regarding dynamics, tonal balance, and sound staging. I'll also add I notice much more how the sound staging varies by recording. |
that's the way i hear t too. i think that at this point it is not a matter of comparing LSA with others and deciding which is "best". i think it is enough to say it is well worth trying and that some folks might just find it does what they want a preamp to do (or not do), and if you are on a budget, SOTA quality is within reach of those that cannot afford much pricier, and excellent ones too, linestages. within its limits it is worthy of the finest systems IMHO. |
You are right guys the Lightspeed Attenuator (LSA) as you guys have nick named it, is the closest you will get to playing music that's truest to the source (cdp, phono ect), and the truest way to hear the way the recording engineers wanted you to hear how they have recorded the music. As it adds nothing and subtracts nothing, like I say it is like you have plugged the (cdp or phono ect) directly into the poweramps input, no preamps at all in the signal path, yet still maintain control over the level (volume). I accept that for some listeners it's preferable to have the added ambience, echo (if you have microphonic tubes). Also the tonal changes, because all active components have their own signature, even different brand potentiometers (Alps, Bournes, Penny&Giles ect)) sound different, compared to a direct (source to poweramp connection) gives, maybe to their ears this is preferable. But the Lightspeed Attenuator is all about listening to the source nothing added nothing subtracted warts and all. BTW "LSA" is a registered speaker manufacturer, hope he doesn't get the -----. Cheers George |
George, I don't understand how the preamp not altering the signal from the source will accomplish what the recording engineer wants you to hear? Is it even possible? By the time the signal gets to the preamp, it has already been altered (tone controlled) by the source (cdp, phono ect) / interconnect. For me, I want a preamp to improve the signal IF necessary so the overall performance improves. With the LSA, I much prefer my MW Transporter than TRL Sony having some tubes in the chain. Also I prefer rolling the sweeter sounding Sylvania 6sn7gt than Shuguang BT CV181-Z. So which one of the 3 the recording engineer wants me to hear? Probably none due to my inferior sources? For an end user, do I really care or just configure my prefer setup? With the VAC, I like both source almost equally despite the very very different sound. I think a passive preamp is more dependent on a good source/interconnect than an active preamp. If a signal is poor, passive just pass through while active can attempt to improve/bandaid. In a sound system, the signal gets altered as it passes through a chain of components. My goal is to select the combination of components that best create the sound base on my personal preferences. |
If the signal/source is poor, yes you can alter, soften,bloat thin out or whatever with an active pre, depending on it's own character of sound, yes a it's band-aid fix as you said. With the Lightspeed Attenuator you hear what the source/signal is giving, if it's not to your liking, I say fix the problem (get a better source) not bad-aid fix, as when you fix the source/signal or put on better cd's on then the band-aid is still there in the signal path, with the chosen active pre. Cheers George |
If you start with a signal from the source (all the information from the recording you can get), isn't any alteration from that simply an additive having nothing to do with the recording, but some haze thrown over the recording, pleasant thought it may be? Maybe I am thinking about this the wrong way, but the signal from the source is the purest reflection of the recording, and any alteration from that is something having nothing to do with the source, the recording closest to the event. It is some type of alteration. which can be nothing but an alteration that pleasant or not, is no part of the recorded performance. Might that be pleasant? Perhaps, but it is something not true to the recording, and if you accept that, it is only a question of how much you are willing to accept as the overlay of a piece of equipment, but how it can it be anything but a distortion from the original, I don't know. And of course the recording itself is already something lost from the live, presence of the original. A bandaid distorts everything in the same way, better in my book to have no bandaid, no coloration from the source. But this reflects fundamental principles of what the equipment should do to a signal, but no information leading to all the audiophile attributes can be good if it alters what is in the source signal, as best as it can convey the recording; the rest is something having nothing to do with the recorded event. Pleasant and enjoyable though it may be, it is not part of the performance and we are only left with coloration and variance from the truth - the truth contained within the recording transmitted through the source component to the preamp. The ideal to me would seem to be a transmission from the source to the amp as if no intermediary component existed, I think that is what the LSA comes close to accomplishing, and qualities such as timbre, sound staging, bloom, frequency, etc are either in the recording, or they are not, but you don't get something false to compensate for the absence of those qualities when they are absent from the recording. |
"If these things "don't add or subtract", why are they so hard to match? Can't perfection be duplicated?" They are not that hard to match, you just need a tube amp or a high input impedance SS amp - gain is not much of an issue in most systems. But it is not a universal solution, that is why we have so many expensive linestages that are essentially plug & play into any system, what is lost is the simplicity and purity of a signal that isn't messaged to enable to work in any environment. So you can have a preamp that will work in any system, but compromised by the circuit complexity required for that, or choose a simpler device that will not work in all systems, but because of that simplicity provides a cleaner connection to the recording if not challenged by impedance mismatches. A little more work to get it right, but well worth it if you want to take this approach. I'm sure George would make a universal device that could work in any system if he could, but it just doesn't exist. This is a minimalist approach that can lead to great sound, but it can't work without some thought given to the source, cables, amps, and speakers. |
"...purest reflection of the recording..." Excellent post Pubul57. When comparing my Supratek to the LSA, I did find the Supratek to be just as transparent without any "usual" tube colorations. I was actually surprised that the Supratek is as neutral as it is being a tube component. Where I found the LSA to be very slightly better was in the lack of any sibilance. Admittedly, I only heard a very slight amount with the Supratek, but I HATE sibilance. So in the end, the LSA and my Supratek sounded almost identical to my ear. The only area where I thought the Supratek may be slightly superior was in the depth of the soundstage. In the end, the LSA seems to give me vitually all of the positives of my Supratek without any clearly identifiable sacrifices. The good news is that the Supratek seems as transparent as the excellent LSA passive and the LSA seems to be as bold, dynamic and full-bodied as an outstanding, highly-regarded tube preamp. They both are excellent. |
That's my point, there are no perfect cds (over 80% are compressed. I like the music but recording sucks), source and interconnects. By the time the signal reaches the preamp, it has been altered. So what you are saying is if you like the sound of a passive, you prefer how the source and interconnect altered, amplified, added / subtracted ... tone controlled the signal. I don't understand the statement if you prefer active, therefore you prefer a tone controlled signal. This is only TRUE if the preamp is the only component in the system. The signal gets altered as it travels through the chain of components. But I do see an advantage of a passive preamp in an integrated amp. Let's agree to disagree and move on. |
Let's agree to disagree and move on. Isn't that what we've been doing for the last 8 pages and nearly 400 posts:) Let's face it, we're relying on the recording engineer to interpret the event and put it down in as accurate a means as possible given their hearing skills and the equipment used to mix the recording (the first introduction of tone controls). I agree with Knghifi that most recordings are awful. So the process is flawed from the start. To listen to what the recording engineer intended us to hear, we have to rely on a means to reproduce the sound of the recording. What that means is comes down to preference (and what we can afford). One such preference is to use as few components as possible in the signal path to eliminate unwanted artifacts and coloration. It's not a perfect means (we still have other tangibles to address in the process) and it may not give us the sound we prefer. It's just one means and the one I and others here subscribe to. But I do see an advantage of a passive preamp in an integrated amp. Ralph Karsten has indicated that the best approach to addressing passive attenuation is to implement it at the amps input. He offers such an upgrade for his amps (M-60 and above). It certainly simplifies the process (one less set of interconnects) and I wish more designers would offer this option. Maybe George can come up with a module based on the Lightspeed design he can OEM to amp manufacturers;) |
Knghifi, I made the exact same point on this thread a while back. I follow what you are saying and it strikes me as the correct way to look at this. This is a very interesting discussion and the main reason I keep looking at this thread. I tried the Lightspeed and found my active preamp to be more "accurate" to the recording. I am very intrigued with this debate and hope it continues. I am certain my preamp is not adding distortion or fuzz or any additional "stuff" unless my hearing is not as good as I think :-) Things like stage depth, dimensionality, micro details, tone etc... make a stereo system sound more like music and more like a wonderful recording. Not sure distortion of any kind would ever help these things? The active delivered this better in my set up. I bet a passive does this better in some systems. The reason - because the music that emerges from a stereo system is the sum of ALL the parts. |
Knghifi, with all due respect, you can move on at any time. The discussion regarding "coloration" and "alteration" of the original signal by EVERY component is a legitimate discussion here. As much I enjoy some things that tubes do (I have them in my system), there is a limit to the tube "effects" that I am willing to accept. As I stated earlier, I was surprised to hear just how little my Supratek altered the signal when compared to the LSA. They are virtually indistinguishable. That's why I opted to use the lower maintenance, no-heat LSA instead. No one is passing judgment here on whether another person should or should not like a particular component's coloration. Clearly there are those who attempt to hear the original source as close as possible and then there are those who prefer the addition of some tube euphonics (I'm one of them). That's not to say that either is right or wrong, it is merely a personal preference. However, there can be no debate that the LSA adds less to the signal than your VAC preamp if you are hearing more artifacts from the VAC. It is clearly not debatable. Now does the VAC make the music sound more real to you? That is another question. But sounding more real versus accurately reproducing what is on the recording are two different things. Let's face it, some recording are done so poorly that it does sound like something is missing and that something does need to be added. The only problem with a component adding to a bad recording is that the component is also adding to good recordings. The simple question remains - does your ear like what is being added. That's all that matters. That's why Baskin Robbins sells 21 flavors. |
