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
 
"There is no preamp which sounds as good as no preamp "

And that was my initial thoughts and point behind this post
But my ears with my system in my room and my music just tell me different, and at the end of the day what I LIKE the sound of is what counts whether it is technically incorrect or not.
So throw me into the corner with the other dunces who like dirty distorted sonics from their tube preamp!
kalali's avatar
kalali
1,977 posts
 
I think this topic was discussed ad nauseam in an earlier thread and the final conclusion was that there is no conclusion. I was so curios that I even went out and bought a Schiit Sys passive to experiment the hypothesis. In my case, I initially thought the music sounded more dynamic with the "direct" connection but I ultimately reversed and put the active pre back in the loop. For me, the direct route felt a little dry and too analytical whereas the active pre added a bit more warmth and sort of took the edge off the corners. All in all, this is a sort of thing that is so dependent on the components (and cables) that you won't be able to get a consensus of which is a better way to go. For example, I could have had a completely different experience if I had bought an uber $ passive vs. a $50 unit. To make it even more subjective, the preference may also depend on the type of music played through the system.
uberwaltz's avatar
uberwaltz OP
13,381 posts
 
To make it even more subjective, the preference may also depend on the type of music played through the system.

Exactly!
I listen to rock music only and just found the direct path too cold and sterile for my taste
I know I am listening to some type of sonic inferiority according to theory but tbh, I really do not care!
rspyder
98 posts
 
This is one of those discussions where there is no right general answer only individual taste.  I'll briefly share my experience.  A friend of mine has an MSB Analog DAC with the preamp/volume module.  Awesome DAC by the way.  I played it by-passing my ARC Ref 10 preamp and using the ARC by-passing the MSB pre.  What struck me first was the difference between the two set-ups.  I have always believed and also experiened the adage that "the pre is where all the damage is done."  The MSB Analog pre section is very good.  Wide soundstage and excellent resolution, particualry on the lower octaves.  However, it could not match the depth, detail, blume and densness of the ARC.  Also the ARC just made subtlties and nuances clearly more real.  Lastly, as one would expect, there was more air around everything with the ARC.  So my taste favoured running the source signal through a very good pre.

Ray
uberwaltz's avatar
uberwaltz OP
13,381 posts
 
The more and more I hear other peoples observations with ARC, the more I feel it is a pre I should never get rid of! Maybe upgrade it or even a newer ARC but for my ears this ARC tube sound just sounds well right for want of a better word.
More to discover