The future of preamps

When I started this thread, I wasn't thinking about the relative merits of passive and active preamps. I was thinking more about digital sources with volume control, integrated amps, and amps with digital inputs, all as ways of eliminating the preamp box entirely. However, all the discussion on active versus passive has certainly been interesting.

I use a tube preamp going directly to a digital signal processor. So there are extra a-d and d-a conversion steps in the processor. When I remove the analogue preamp, resolution and transparency go up slightly, but the sound becomes thin and uninvolving.

I've read Atmasphere's comments in the past regarding control of interconnect cables. Although I clearly hear differences in my system made by different balanced cables, I suppose that this could be due to the inability of my front end components to adequately control the cables. It seems to me that this could be true. Mind-boggling, to think that the entire high end interconnect industry could be based on this!

Hello Phusis,
It seems you and I are actually in agreement, we both use live acoustical music as a very useful template. We both adhere to the concept of simply trusting our ears when decisions are made regarding preferred audio components. Of course we may very well reach different conclusions even if we both were listening to the same identical components/systems.
Thats perfectly fine as individual taste and a particular bias for a certain sound that is deemed right will surely vary amongst individuals. I believe both of us are confident and secure with our paths toward audio-musical satisfaction. Take care.
Charles,

In his post dated 3-22-13 in this thread Ralph provided what I consider to be both a uniquely excellent explanation and an extremely persuasive proof of his contention that a balanced interface MEETING CERTAIN DESIGN CRITERIA (which unfortunately are not met by most audiophile-oriented components) can completely eliminate interconnect cable artifacts. See also his post dated 3-28-13 in that thread, which responded to some questions I had on the issue.

Which is not to say, however, that I take an ideological position against passive preamps, or against having no preamp. As I see it, in audio there are usually multiple ways to do you know what to a feline and achieve good results, to express in a different way a point that Charles, for one, has made many times.

In my own case, fwiw, the question is moot, as I require a full function preamp. Some of the reasons for that being: I want it to be able to drive multiple outputs (both volume controlled and not volume controlled), as well as select among multiple inputs; I want to be able to mute the speakers while listening to headphones, without having to turn off the power amp; my power amp is located too far from the preamp for a passive preamp, or direct drive from many source components, to be suitable; and the output levels of some of my source components would probably be marginal without some added gain. I'd expect those kinds of practical requirements, that a goodly number of people undoubtedly still have, to be among the reasons that preamps are unlikely to go away anytime soon.

Regards,
-- Al

Atmasphere:
"The rule of thumb here is:
If you can hear differences between interconnect cables then the source is not controlling the cable."

Sorry, wrong again Atmasphere, the only time all cables will be made to sound the same/equal.
Is when the input of the poweramp is made extremely low input impedance as well, like 500ohm or less. And what's driving it (pre or source) has an output impedance extremely low like 1ohm or less so it can drive that very low input impedance of the amp.
This then will negate any differences in interconnect sound and they should then all sound the same.
The only down side is with that lower input impedance poweramp hardly any sources or preamps can drive it.

Cheers George

I'm hoping someone could figure out how to eliminate the power amp as well so I can find a different hobby.