Would adding a pre back into the system eliminate


some extreme glare?
I recently switched from a tube pre to just using a Bel Canto 2.5 straight to the amp. It has more detail but is very revealing as far as terrible sounding cd's. I have also lost the robustness that it had. I have to turn it up quite a ways to get on top but by that time it is too loud. I think I am going to need another pre to take care of that. I still have some mid range glare though that is excruciating. Mostly voices. I am including a list of my setup. I don't know if it is my speaker cables, or lack of pre. I should have good sound with the BC 2.5 and amp I think, but with out purchasing individual components and seeing I don't know. I would appreciate any thoughts. Normal living room, carpet, drapes, pictures, etc.
McCormack UDP-1 love it, plays dvd audio and good cd's with excellent sound.
Silnote Poseidon Sig digital to BC 2.5 huge upgrade from what I had
Harmonic Tech Magic Link II xlr to amp maybe even more so than above
PBN Custom amp dual mono 160w/ch class A/B
DH Labs Silver Sonic Q 10 speaker cables
NHT 3.3 speakers.... plenty capable,they sound great.
jerryaudio
Jerryaudio,
What you describe is the fundamental crux(dilemma) of this recurrent topic.
The fullness, substance, body, dynamics and tonal density (flesh on the
bone) aspects that many listeners cite with the addition of an active
preamp.

Either you'll view it as simply added coloration and not true to the source.
Or
You will view its addition as vital music information that completes the
sonic signal otherwise missing without the active preamp.
That's your individual call to make.
As this and previous threads have demonstrated, there are passionate
advocates on both sides.
Charles,
Post removed 
Hi Jerryaudio,
Do you have a particular replacement active preamp to try or are you as yet undecided? There are numerous fine choices available, you're in a good situation.
Charles,