Placette RVC review in Stereophile

The Placette Active has no gain, although you can get it if you ask. So it is, effectsively, a buffered passive. I don't think you need sacrifice dynamics with a normal passive line stage, but things need to be carefully matched. With the Active, that problem goes away.

So then what would be ideal matching for a passive to work as well as an active. I guess it is optimizing source output impedance with amp input impecance assuming gain is more than sufficient. But what are those optimal impedances?

Good question, I hope someone with knowledge will chime in.

Source: typically the more energy your source outputs, the (much) better. Output impedance is part of the equation (W=V2/R, remember) -- but as usual line sources have a sort of standard 2V spec, the impedance is good indicator.

On the amp side, a relatively stable input of 10k ohm & above should be fairly OK across the acoustic spectrum.

Of course, you have the attenuator in between and its impedance changes will affect the result. The buffered option would keep the output impedance fairly stable across the board, which is probably why some people find it "better".

I read that the source output impedance should be 10 times lower than the input impedance on the preamp-amp, but I would love to hear Guy or Crump take on this since they are the main preamp people!!!

I am using a diy passive preamp in a perfect system for this, I used to have a Metaxas Opulence preamp and I am not sure if I miss it, mainly Dynamics are gone I would say I lost 15% dynamics and won 15% transparency: Active vs Passive. Let me tell you the only active preamp could ever listen to was this one...I would love to listen to the Blowtorch or the Placette Active....phono stage anyone?

PS: Perfect system would be Source with 2 volts output and 50 ohm output impdance.....Amps with 0.15 volt input sensitivity and 1 mega ohm input impedance...yes I do miss certain dynamics (if ever so slightly).