Best Preamp = No Preamp?

Swampwalker --

It seems you take things a bit out of context here, and misunderstand what I mean.

My "gripe" in a sense with poster Grannyring was that I found he tended to label the DAC-direct defenders to adhere to a "non-real" sound:

To some it sounds cleaner or more resolving, but I feel this is either mistaken for "transparency" or some folks like that lighter than real sound. Ha! I know that sounds negative, but we do all have preferences.

To each their own would then be like saying: the ones who prefer the "real" sound, and those (the DAC-direct people) who embrace a "faux" imprinting. On the surface it's a benign statement saying "to each their own," but in the context of what he wrote I found it got a slight knowing-it-better tone.

My comment ""To each their own [fortune]" may also apply to those who've struck upon a winning DAC-direct combination instead of being simply in the camp of preferring a faux sonic imprinting" was trying to communicate that those in favor of a DAC-direct solution wasn't necessarily defenders of a "faux" sound, but could as well achieve a winning combination with "real" sonics.

OK, understood, Phusis. You make good sense.

My statements are fact and true for me and my opinion based on my pretty vast experience over the past 2-4 years. Nothing to disagree with. My opinion, my experience, my recent experience.

My preamp is special and has always proven to be better than a direct or passive with the systems it has found itself in.

I can absolutely state this is absolutely true for me and every other person and system my preamp has been compared to direct or passive attenuators. That is the scope and reality of my statement.

I have also found we Aphiles have sonic preferences that lead some to active preamps and others to no preamp. No way to argue or persuade as preferences are preferences.....end of story.

One last clarification. To each his own means just that. If you think it
sounds more real direct, then it does for you. If you think a good active
sounds more real in your given system, then it does for you.

The direct and/or passive crowd seems to state the active crowd likes a
less than "real" sound. Exactly the kind of statement Phusis
stated he would like to stay away from. I agree with Phusis in that we
should stay away from that conclusion. The knife cuts both ways. Sonic
beauty or fidelity is indeed in the mind and ear of the beholder.

Preference is the real determinant here. I will restate my comment on the
direct/passive crowd "mistaking resolution for..." by simply saying they
perceive and hear live music or live/real sounding music to sound more like
their passive/direct set up. In my opinion the two camps are attracted to
different sonic attributes and perceive "real" differently.