2. amps-preamps
  3. 125047-818

I used to think passive preamps were superior to active preamps given right the setup, but

my recent evaluation of a modded old SS preamp has me a little befuddled.  I've evaluated $10K+ active preamps in the past and was never impressed especially given their cost.  In general, I've found passives to do better job. I know there's ongoing debate on this.  But here's a very illuminating video on the subject by Bascom King, one of the legends of high end audio.

https://youtu.be/HHl8F9amyY4
dracule1
dracule1 OP
1,085 posts
 
Georgelofi, I know the arguments for using passive preamps (including Nelson’s), as I am a big supporter of the passive route. Having used passives of all types for the past 9 years, I know the benefits. It’s just that this little modded active preamp has turned my views upside down. The only thing I don’t like about this active preamp is the over damped bass which doesn’t sound quite natural. Everything else is as good or better than my LDR preamp and other passives in my arsenal.
dracule1 OP
1,085 posts
 
Kernelbob, I too have the Tortuga Audio preamp with variable impedance. It is the best passive I have ever tried. However, my modded active preamp, which I bought used (no longer in production) and had it modded (under $500 total for preamp and mod), is better or just as good in almost every category, except for the bass which I have indicate earlier is too damped. The Tortuga has the best bass of any other passives I’ve tried. Its bass is like that of a very good active preamp, extended and dynamic with just the right amount of natural bloom.
david12
1,454 posts
 

The first thing I would say, is how different Passive's can sound from each other. I had a chance to compare 4 Passive Pre's over a weekend, which might not have been long enough, but two were frankly poor, muddy, lacking  detail, dynamics and base. I had a DIY built clone of the Music First Audio Baby reference and an actual Baby reference. Both were excellent in comparison. In fact, what one is led to expect from a Passive, quite neutral, transparent, with no hint of colouration to my ears. The actual baby reference was a little better.

 On the basis of this test, I believe the MFA Baby reference is hard to beat compared with many active Pre's. Like Kernelbob, I think it clearly bettered the ARC Ref 3.

 What am I using now, the Modwright 36.5? I just prefer it to a Passive, greater dynamics and a more engaging, enjoyable, musical, for want of a better word, sound. Still if you get a chance of auditioning an MFA Baby Reference in your system, give it a try. Before anyone else says it, I agree, it is quite expensive, so try and find a second hand one.

milpai's avatar
milpai
2,369 posts
 
I am saying this specifically for TVC. I have said this many times and will repeat again. You need to make sure that a TVC should have a MATCHING system. You really need to look into the source voltage, amplifier sensitivity, loudspeaker sensitivity, cables, etc for your system to "come alive" with the TVC. If you have taken good care, then it is really difficult to beat a well made TVC. Years back I heard that the "core" of the TVC also made a difference. From my personal experience I have compared my $1.6K TVC to a $4K active preamp and the preamp went back to the dealer. I have plenty gain in my system and absolutely have no issues with bass or treble. At this point, my speakers go down to only 40Hz. I am looking forward to upgrade to a loudspeaker that goes down to at least 30Hz. I am sure that my TVC can easily handle that.
dracule1 OP
1,085 posts
 
System matching with passive pre is critical indeed. It can make or break the sound.  You really don't have to worry about that with an active pre, which I find so convenient and much less of a headache. 
More to discover