Is no preamp really better that a good preamp?

....which still does not explain how the Aesthetix could fix the DirectStream's 'problems' and,
....that rather than tout another brand, build one of your own.
The synergy is now complete.

Cheers! J.

An excerpt from today's blog post by Mr. McGowan on the same subject:

Our newest DAC, DirectStream, ... has zero loss at any level setting–a major achievement. So, how could a control with zero resolution be suspect? That’s a question I have been mulling on for some time now.

One piece of the puzzle seems obvious. We know that tiny changes in the way internal FPGA process are organized make significant differences in sound. Even changes to the display affect sound quality. It’s a delicate process when jitter, power supply and the tiniest of changes can be heard and must be attended to. What’s to stop us from believing that different level settings have different sound qualities–despite the fact there are no measurable resolution losses?

Were it to be found true much would be explained. For instance, we know not all preamps sound better than DACs directly into power amps. In fact, most don’t. This observation lends credibility to the explanation that it is not preamps that make DACs sound better, rather, it is preamps helping DACs not sound worse. This theory can only be true if the preamp is of sufficient quality to add less degradation than using the DAC’s volume control. That all kind of makes sense.

But, just because something makes sense, doesn’t mean it’s true. How do we make this determination to see if this theory holds water?

Regards,
-- Al

Milpai, I have had a TVC using S&B transformers and now have an autoformer unit. As you know I am a fan of passive preamps in general and also own George's Lightspeed. They are all a bit finicky to work with but in the right system are great devices. I have been fortunate to have such a system.

However, a couple years ago I found the need for more gain in my system due to my increased use of analog vinyl and tape sources. So I turned to an active preamp for that purpose, and in my case one that is quite transparent. I still use my Lightspeed in a digital system I have set up, where it works flawlessly.

In Mr BHK's own words :-

"As obvious as it may seem, I would like to hear his take on why his preamp improves the sound in comparison to running the DS direct.  I know some still prefer a preamp, I personally don't, but there is some interaction going on that no one seems to clearly understand.  I know Paul had his socks knocked off in comparison to his reference preamp, but my socks are generally well attached and not subject to such easy removal.  In other words call me an agnostic waiting for the right explanation to shift me into belief." -Pmotz

"Hi Pmotz.
You bring up a good point and rather timely as I have been listening to my Direct Stream DAC direct into my power amp as I take my ptototype BHK Signature preamp (1 or 3) in and out of my system to go work on it in my lab.  The system without the preamp in it sounds very nice and acceptable but when the preamp is back in there is a very obvious increase in musicality, transient attack, spaciousness, and detail.  I am amazed and delighted with this creation.  But I must disappoint as I must be in the camp of those who cannot explain it. I just know what it does for my musical enjoyment and that, in the end, is where it is at for me." - BHK

http://www.psaudio.com/forum/bhk-power-and-pre-amp-forum/bascoms-preamp-chronicles/

"For myself if we have this kind of source with these types of problems that has a VC, I can't think of it being hi-end or been designed right, better to me to change it, mod it for something that is."

RMAF 2015 award for best DAC goes to....

http://www.stereophile.com/content/rocky-mountain-international-hifi-press-awards#dUsWps4IBGMLTqEi.97

....the PS Audio DS.