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
 
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.


georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 
and you can sometimes have a bad match. In a case like this, using a preamp may be a less colored option.

OP: " 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.
In that OP’s statement you quoted. He did have a perfect impedance/drive match when he went direct, and he wasn’t "bit stripping" because he was at 80% of the digital domain VC.
So it comes down to that he preferred the "colouration/distortion" of the active preamp that aided in fixing a system or room imbalance, and not because the preamp was more "accurate" to what was coming out of the source.

Cheers George
tomcy6's avatar
tomcy6
2,612 posts
 
George, Active preamps can also be fixing poor recordings or manufacturing problems that cannot be fixed by greater transparency in the home system.
audioman58's avatar
audioman58
4,246 posts
 
I have had every combo uiu can think of. An added flavor of not ,to sound 
Natural is thd goal.  Direct from a dac, or passive just gas No amplifier gain stage 
Which is essential for dynamics, especially J Der duress of a large orchestra 
The performers should always be rock solid and in place where all performers can be picked out. With passive it at times can be  unfocused  and the sound stage 
Indecisive.  Vacuum tube preamps are by far the best balanced  with a Solid State amp. Vacuum tubes gave their own distortions that are natural to thd ear 
Whrn a solid state devise starts to distort it is Odd harmonics and sharper to yhd ear. With Vacuum tube distortions are more Even harmonics  with bloom 
That is in mist cases appealing.  Fort a Solid state preamp to be warm with similar characteristics  to a tube  uding Mosfets,Bipolar  or other methods and normally  2-3 X the cost  on average, also with Vacuum tubes each brand gives a different sonic signature which then allows you to Taylor your system to your specific taste.

More to discover