2. amps-preamps
  3. 127815-90127

To Pre or not to Pre? Here is my take

I remember reading in many places that the best preamp was no preamp.
Finally in a position to test that theory
Equipment is Esoteric sa-50 player, audio research ls preamp, bat vk600 power amp.
So I let everything warm up for an hour or so and then played some Halestorm through the system, for anybody who is not familiar with Mz. Hale, she is similar to a smoother Bonnie Tyler with more range! Her band has some great bass guitar and drum work as well so a nice little workout.
After 5 or 6 tracks I changed over to powering the bat direct from the esoteric using the same cardas xlr interconnects.
It only took a couple of tracks to confirm
I just did not like this sound, bass was much thinner, soundstage not as wide, vocals not as smokey for want of a better description of Mz. Hales style.
Hooked the ls2 back and joy was restored!

What does this tell me?
That absolutely the ls preamp is adding its own sonic signature to the mix, in theory that equates to probably a more "dirty" sound but to me this was the sound I preferred.
Now obviously no 2 people listening to the same gear are going to hear the same thing, its impossible!
However playing MY music on MY gear the sound going through the ls2 preamp was the sound that I wanted to hear, end of story.
Oh trust me its not just value perception, I sort of WANTED the sound to be better without the ls2 preamp as I could have then sold it and spent the money elsewhere! 
I know there will be lots of people who can spout theories to prove I am full of it but the only judge of the sound of your own system worth worrying about is yourself!
128x128uberwaltz
uberwaltz's avatar
uberwaltz OP
13,381 posts
 
" Way too many variables in the audio chain to make a general conclusion. Results are completely system/cable dependent. Worth the experimentation nonetheless. "

I agree entirely, move my equipment to another room and the result could be entirely different. Or bring another set of ears in and they may hear it differently to myself.
Not trying to make a general conclusion, just stating my experience is all.
mesch
3,421 posts
 
Uberwaltz, I found your post to be very relevant to my situation. I have a tube pre and am about to try a DAC with volume control. Like you, I am just wanting to try the alternatives for myself. I will get back after.

I don't always listen at the highest volume I sometimes do, often less than 80% of that. If a DAC can't be sonically at it's best at less than 80% volume then use of a volumed DAC seems less than ideal.  
oblgny's avatar
oblgny
845 posts
 
Not only is your ARC LS2 preamp adding something to your amp's sonic signature,  ALL preamps do.  (I've had an LS2,  an LS3,  and a good many other preamps in my system over the years as well.)

I've also added a "passive" preamp to my system and discovered that I prefer "regular" preamps better.  While much has been espoused regarding preamps that "get out of the way" and allow the most pure of signals to be heard,  switching out a good many of them over the last few years tells me that every manufacturer produces a different sound.  The same can be stated for amplifiers.  Generally speaking I really enjoy ARC products,  but I've recently - within the last year - settled upon a BAT VK3i tubed pre for my Pass Labs X150.5 amp and I love the combination so much I've pretty much stopped "s'perimenting" with my system.  

To my humble ears the BAT is a tad narrower in the soundstage than the ARC pre's I've had are,  but nothing that I've found to be negative or detracting from all its other qualities.  If I were to find a tubed ARC preamp within my budget - which is an occasionally temperamental thing regarding audio stuff - I would definitely toss another in the chain just for the hell of it.

uberwaltz's avatar
uberwaltz OP
13,381 posts
 
Good to hear on the arc as i have had this one now for over 3 years and have yet to feel the desperate need to change...lol. But you know how that goes!
I was watching a bat vk31se on ebay as i thought it may make a good mate for the bat vk600 power amp. so will possibly give that a whirl if the price stays fair.
guess i will be content with knowing I am "colouring" my music regardless.
rsv4
18 posts
 
" What does this tell me?
That absolutely the ls preamp is adding its own sonic signature to the mix, in theory that equates to probably a more "dirty" sound but to me this was the sound I preferred."

That can be true in some cases, but not all. There's several variables involved when driving an amp directly from a source, and you can sometimes have a bad match. In a case like this, using a preamp may be a less colored option. 

" It only took a couple of tracks to confirm
I just did not like this sound, bass was much thinner, soundstage not as wide, vocals not as smokey for want of a better description of Mz. Hales style. Hooked the ls2 back and joy was restored!"

When I read that statement, it sounds like your system is doing a better job at reconstructing the original recording with the preamp in the chain, than without. At this level we can only speculate, but in your case using the preamp may be the more "accurate" solution.

" I remember reading in many places that the best preamp was no preamp. "

That can be read more than one way. For example, if you were evaluating 2 or more preamps, the best option would be the preamp that is the most transparent (least colored). Another way to look at the situation, and I make this statement quite often myself, is no preamp is better than a cheap preamp. A volume control on a source (digital or analog), or a passive, will usually outperform a low to midrange active line stage. Keep in mind, though, all this is a judgment call that you need to make. Every situation is different.


More to discover