Preamps. Do we really need them?

Pmkalby, the signal is stored in the buffer, cleaned up and then released as a new signal full of PRAT, you didn't know that?

Dave

Pace, Rhythm, And Tequila!

I'll have whatever Dave's having...

There is no way to "clean up" an analog signal by running it through a few stages of amplification. There were (are?) active devices like Carver's Phase Linear Autocorrelator which was a dynamic noise filter which "cleaned up" LP rumble and surface noise quite effectively, but I don't think that such circuitry is included in a preamp (other than the Phase Linear preamp).

In the digital domain, cleanup is possible to correct various digital parameters like timing.

However, a preamp can change the sound, and perhaps in a way that sounds good. Usually this is the result of harmonic distortion, which adds harmonics similar to those produced by musical instruments. For example, some violins produce a different harmonic signature than others when played in exactly the same way. The harmonics that are missing in the inferior instrument might be added in the preamp. However, IMHO, this sort of sound improvement should have been done by the recording engineer when the media was created.

Passive preamplification can:

- roll off the top end and the bottom end
- limit dynamics
- limit resolution, especially at low volumes
- limit gain

Now there are definite levels of passive preamps. And possibly the absolute best passive preamp that is matched 100% correctly to a given system may be better than an active preamp (maybe any active). But these passives are few and far between (I have yet to hear one). Passive preamps get better and better as the volume control is opened up more and more (as more signal flows through them). I went from passive preamplification to tube active preamplification and it was like a haze was lifted off of the music.

KF