Best Preamp - NO preamp... (?)

It does, indeed, depend on each person's personal preference.

I have both and use both active and passive preamps, at various times, depending upon the sound I'm seeking.

I got a Creek OBH-21 Passive Preamp, primarily to use as a remote volume control.  And found the sound to be somewhat more transparent and somewhat more detailed and clear than my Parasound JC-2, and my Audio Research Ref 3.  Though, the "somewhat more" is a fairly small difference.  

I A:B'd the OBH-21 vs the Ref 3 with my wife as the judge... and... she clearly preferred the sound of the Ref 3 - called it more real and life-like sound than from the passive preamp.  Though, the passive preamp still sounded like it was a bit more detailed and clear.   

The tubes of the Ref 3, produce a deeper, more localized soundstage / image, which has more ambience - thus, the more life-like, realistic sound.  No doubt the effects of the harmonics of the tubes - "good distortion."  

The interesting thing is... the OBH-21 cost about $250, compared to the $4000-7000 of the active preamps to which I was comparing it.  So... for the money, it's hard to justify the price premium of the active preamps, when the passive preamp sounds so good and so close to the active preamps.  And... I understand... some of the custom made passives, sound even better, for a nominal increase in cost.

One compromise... might be... to use a passive preamp and a tube buffer - which might give you the best of both passive and active preamps.  

Of course... if you must have all of the connectivity and features of a better active preamp, then most passive preamps are not an option.  

So... "to each his own."

The first time one does this it is all very exciting and new, but as aforesaid, there are combinations of gear where all things considered the pre in the chain is preferable. One simply has to try with each system. 

ami, very simple to understand in terms of simple math:

usually in dedicative active preamp the volume control is substantially better also applies to the rest of sound quality or characteristics. the minimalistic units i've mentioned may even use smaller signal preamp path than your source components believe it or not. if your source components have 'direct' option bypassing volume control, than you should at least try out active preamp for the beginning found as a loaner at your local or nearest high end electronics retailer. 

None of you have mentioned using a high quality passive pre.
Ami, you should consider this-  http://www.thebespokeaudiocompany.com/

Thanks for all your comments!

RE: shorter path / better parts with preamp - I doubt that is the case here. The passive I was using has a $400 P&G volume pot, and the volume control of the DS DAC is a digital one AFAIK, so it introduces no additional components in the signal path.

RE: a more expensive passive or some 'magic' signal processors, I am still to be convinced that adding anything in the signal path, no matter how good, can make things better.

RE: What is "better"? that is something I can't argue with. If you like the specific distortion or the coloration that a component introduces, then by all means, go for it. I am on the search for "Hi-Fi" - transparency and not coloration. I am of the opinion that if you need to add a preamp to make up for your speaker's deficiencies, you should be looking for better speakers.

RE: PS Audio BHK, I will ask Paul in the PS audio forum again. It will be interesting to hear his answer :-)

Have a wonderful weekend all!