Does anyone care to ask an amplifier designer a technical question? My door is open.

What differentiates a passive “preamp” from a “tube buffer” with level and switching control? I really like the idea of a simple level control with switching capability, but as I stated earlier, my first try at using a passive, albeit a very inexpensive example, was less than stellar. Specifically, I’m looking at a Schiit Saga to try as a replacement for my tubed preamplifier. I’m weighing options for use with a tube amplifier, but I’d also like to understand what a tube buffer does differently than a tube preamp. Also, would the gain of a preamp “help” a lower powered amp sound more muscular, or is that more “made up” information?

When the ARC SP--3 was considered THE pre-amp to own, Frank Van Alstine took a look at it. He found the RIAA eq to be a little too off to be acceptable, the basic circuit to have a little too much non-linearity, and the power supply to be somewhat weak. He came up with solutions to all those faults (correcting the RIAA eq, reducing the distortion, and increasing the power supply's "stiffness"/lowering it's impedances), and offered a modestly-priced mod to correct the faults in the SP-3. Yet Bill Johnson continued to be considered a designer above all others by the High End community, and his ARC products therefore came attached with a certain cache' that others lacked. Some things never change ;-) .

For anyone looking for a modestly-powered tube amp, rather than pay $5995 for a poorly-designed amp that produces only 3.2 watts into 8 ohms and 1.2w into 4 (and at a very high output impedance, which will change the frequency response of almost all loudspeakers), take a look at, say ;-), the Music Reference RM-10 Mk.2. 25 watts pure Class A (a 35w Class A/B is also available, I believe), low output impedance, very long tube life, great sound, all for $5000. @twoch, if that strikes you as "B. kicking", so be it!

@tomic601, your mention of mentoring has jogged my memory (too much alliteration? ;-) . Everyone who met or even read the writings of Harvey Rosenberg knows what an interesting character he was. He was also a generous man, as I found out in the mid-80's.

Harvey was famously known for his love of three hi-fi produtcs: the original Quad ESL loudspeaker, the Futterman OTL amplifier, and the Decca cartridge. I had a Decca Blue back in '73/4, then moved on, along with everyone else, to a Supex SD-900e moving coil (into a Levinson JC-1 head amp). By the mid-80's, my interest in the Decca had been rekindled, partly because of Harvey's writings about it. He obviously understood the cartridge better than anyone else, so I wrote him (no email ;-) at NYAL, asking him every question I could think of about the Decca.

One day the phone rang, and it was Harvey. I hadn't included a phone number, but he called Glendale information and got it! He started talking about the Decca, but soon had to put me on hold to take care of something (a knock at the door, perhaps). I put down the phone, and ran for a pen and paper. When I again picked up the phone, he was yammering on, oblivious to me not being on the other end ;-) . He told me ALL about the cartridge: capacitive and resistive loading, appropriate arms, damping, etc. I wrote it all down, and still refer to my notes. Thanks Harvey, you are greatly missed.

Sigh, in the best way possible. The RM-5, one of my favorite components of all time regardless of price.

Speaking of Harry, I was tuning up two of his systems, one with the CAT and one with the Classe. I had my RM-5 with me and me and Harry listened to it for about two hours.

Man did I ever love that preamp! You could mate the RM-5 with anything and it would transform that amp and speaker combo. When Kenny started dampening his Pre-amp it was all over for me, I kept the RM-5 close by. It tuned better than all of them. I think I toured with the RM-5 for about 3 years.

mg