2. amps-preamps
  3. 1042062775

preamp vs. no-preamp

Hi guys, I would like to know your opinions regarding the classic question (which also has been posted many times in this forum, I know, I know) whether or not a preamp is needed for a good (= musical sound). You see, if you can delete the preamp and connect the DAC into the poweramp, you can save lots of money, sometimes up to $ 15,000 for a Conrad-Johnson ART (this is off course an extreme example). The money you have spent on the preamp can be used for buying a better source or amplifier (mono's?). So theoretically if you don't have a preamplifier you can improve the sound reproduction by: deleting redundant audio circuitry and interconnect cables, upgrading the quality of you source, poweramplifier or speakers.
My personal experience is that without a preamplifier the sound is becoming thin and uninvolving, but I know there are audiophiles who don't have a preamp in their audio system.
dazzdax
jayctoy's avatar
jayctoy
4,203 posts
 
I am for with preamp.Flemke by the the adcom 750 is more
tansparent than krell ksl i used to have.I think very
people realize how good is this 750.
sorry to get sidetrack.I have tried theta cd,dac audio
alchemy,and heard wadia,and heard the accuphase $27,000
without preamp,they sound better with preamp,although
if, i dont have the money, i can live listening without
preamp, with this gear especially the accuphase Sacd.
I heard the conrad j ART this gave me the hair raising
experience.
tonyp54
130 posts
 
As with everything else in this hobby, it's really about what kind of sound is "preferred" vs which sound is the "best". If you prefer the sound using a preamp, then thats the "best" sound for you. There is no ultimate sound that we will all agree on. It always amazes me that we hear that the goal of hi end is to pass the music from the source to the speakers without adding anything. Yet, if we line up 10 equally expensive components for comparison, each sounds different. Obviously, its not in the best interests of the manufacturers to have all amps sound the same, because our preferences vary so much as individuals. So they intentionally tweak their products for a particular sound that will appeal to a large enough audience, who then declare it to have the "best" sound. Best for them, but not for everyone.
jp_60173
35 posts
 
If you have a player that has an analog volume control you are better off without a preamp. If your player has a digital volume control, a preamp may do a better job.
jayarr
117 posts
 
As with everything else in life, it depends. If you go the no preamp route you have to be very careful. The most important factor is now mating the source properly with the amp. Source output impedance and amp input impedance and sensitivity are paramount. The newer transformer based "passive" preamps are the way to go. Impedance matching is accomplished. Once these issues of impedance and sensitivity have been addressed then I believe no preamp is the way to go. With the transformer passives, dynamics and bass frequencies are preserved with the added benefit of the usual gains in transparency that passives are known for.
countryjazz2
17 posts
 
I'm reviving a VERY old thread to ask a question. What about a cassette deck in between the CD player and amp? Due to my CJ blowing out, I temporarily ran the CD player (an X-Ray, which has no volume control) through my NAK 670zx (which does have an output control), and connected the tape deck to the amp (Classe 15). It actually sounds great (although I do miss the "tube sound"). Plenty of gain and power. I've read about the problems with compatibility and sensitivity, but as I said, there is plenty of power and gain. Is there a problem with this as a temporary setup until I can get my pre-amp fixed? I do not want to hurt my speakers (Vandy 2ce sigs) or my amp. Thoughts?
More to discover