Passive preamp

smodtactical
How come passives are not more popular? Everyone seems to use active and seems more commonly made as well.

They are, and now going direct because so many sources now have volume controls are taking over from them now. But if you don’t have source volume control passives are the next most transparent/dynamic/uncoloured way of having a volume contrpol.

A Quote from Nelson Pass

“We’ve got lots of gain in our electronics. More gain than some of us need or want. At least 10 db more. Think of it this way: If you are running your volume control down around 9 o’clock, you are actually throwing away signal level so that a subsequent gain stage can make it back up.

Routinely DIYers opt to make themselves a “passive preamp” - just an input selector and a volume control.

What could be better? Hardly any noise or distortion added by these simple passive parts. No feedback, no worrying about what type of capacitors – just musical perfection.

And yet there are guys out there who don’t care for the result. “It sucks the life out of the music”, is a commonly heard refrain (really - I’m being serious here!). Maybe they are reacting psychologically to the need to turn the volume control up compared to an active preamp.”

Cheers George

never sounded any good to me

I stumbled upon an integrated unit that has both active and passive preamplification.   Creek Destiny2.  Although may be frowned upon in high-end circles, I find the ability to chose between passive and active (Destiny2 offers gain of 3, 6 or 9 dB) to be advantageous when choosing between source and music genre.  Jazz, classical and acoustic vocals shine when passive sourcing CDs or LPs, allowing the output stage of the CD or phono stage to drive the amplifier.   Laid back yes, pleasing immensely so.  Active, well think Baba O'Reilly, or any other guitar based rock LP.

nekoaudio's posts on this subject are right on, and consistent with my experience