Using Double Preamplification vs X10D V3

I believe there is more to this phenomenon than people realize (impedance/gain matching issues, and such). As Onhwy61 says, just because it works doesn't mean it's right. But on the other hand, since it works so well, it could very well be "right." We're talking about relatively subtle differences here, not huge glaring changes, so for Onhwy61 to suggest there must be something "seriously wrong" with our systems is sheer blatant hyperbole. So I must ask, why all the drama? Is this finding that upsetting?

I find a lot of closed-minded thinking in this hobby, and it's a shame. The simple fact is that the "purist" strategy does not always yield the best (or most musical) results.

It is not closed minded to reject schemes that fly in the face of basic engineering/system design. Ask yourself this question -- "Is your solution the simplest solution that addresses the problem?" With the extra interconnects, rack space requirements, power cords, issues involving gain and optimal signal to noise and potential circuit overload, I just don't imagine how you can answer "Yes". However, that could simple be because I lack imagination. But then again I've never read of a reviewer system, seen a manufacturer's display at a high end show, heard a demo at a dealer or seen such a system on Audiogon (until now) which features running one preamp into another. I'll grant you that you could just be at the leading edge, way ahead of the pack, but you could just as easily just be out there. Either way, it's all good, but common sense would say some ways are less good than others.

They make hybrid preamps--Curcico mods of dynas for example. If it takes two to do it, my bet is that somewhere there is one single preamp that will do the same thing as well, better, cheaper for sure.

"Just because it works doesn't mean it's right"

Incredible....a guy tweaks his sytem and gets the sound he likes, someone else comes along and says it might not be right because of the way it is put together.

There's more than one way to skin a cat.

I say if it sounds good to you, it's right....period.

Ok, well, I am a reviewer, so there is at least one reviewer's setup that is presently using that particular arrangement. It may not be the simplest solution to the problem, but it's one that works well.

If the two preamps were actually combined together on one chassis that would be simpler and more optimum, and no-one would raise an eyebrow, not even Onhwy61.

As it is, we have two totally isolated power supplies for the respective solid-state and tube stages with the ability to fine tune the power cords and interconnects for each section, independently.

Since we are going through an extra volume control and an extra set of interconnects, the configuration is not ideal. Yet to my ears, in many ways, the combination of the two sounds better than either preamp alone. That is all I'm saying, and I'm hoping it doesn't raise your blood pressure too much.

If someone would volunteer to combine these two preamps on a single chassis for me and bypass one volume control, that would be great. But until that happens, I hope you don't mind if I enjoy the great sound I'm hearing right now.

In addition to the Z-man and Musical Fidelity tube line buffers, I will remind you that a few years ago there was another audiophile product specifically developed for this purpose, called the Harmonic Recovery System, by SCE. It got terrific reviews in many of the mags. The reviewers universally agreed that their systems sounded considerably better by adding this device (essentially a high-current, solid-state preamp) than without it.