Passive Pre - No Regrets?


I'm interested in hearing from folks who have moved from a high quality active preamp (I'm currently using a CAT SL1 Ulitmate)to a passive preamp and have had no regrets. I'm particularly interested in hearing from those that have switched to a Placette or Sonic Euphoria (the two I'm considering). I'm using a CAT JL2 Amp feeding Merling VSM-MX.
pubul57
I also have tried the passive route a couple of times in the last decade. Yes, initially there is some satisfaction about clarity, blacker background, etc. However, I always wind up missing the dynamic impact and rythmatic drive that only a active preamp can bring. The active has more body and soul to the music, IMHO.

I compare it to listening to Nordost Valhalla cables. Initially they are breathtaking, but over time, I found them to be too thin and lacking musical weight for my tastes.

Obviously some will have different opinions, but they are wrong. :-)

(I'm kidding guys!)

John
So, you only want to hear from people that had positive experiences? It sounds like you've already bought the unit and now need support for your decision. Just kidding. But, what about comments from people who haven't had good luck with this?
There is a lot of confusion about this. The volume control in a passive is no different than the volume control in any active preamp. It is in a different box so you neeed cables to hook it up, that's the only difference. The volume control inside a preamp is also a passive device. You can build either one with a transformer, pot, stepped attenuator, whatever.

You can successfully use a passive if:

1. the rest of system has enough gain to drive the speakers to the desired level

2. the input impedance of the passive is high enough to properly load the source

3. the output impedance of the passive is low enough to be a good match to the amp

4. you don't try to use cables that are too long or have high reactance

Those that had poor results failed to meet one or more of these requirements and finding a passive that meets all of the above for a given set of components may be impossible. Trying to use one in a system that requires the extra gain from an active preamp is doomed to fail. Many don't understand what these requirements mean, choose an ill suited passive for the job, and end up with lousy sound. That's not the fault of the passive but of the person putting together the system.

The big problem with volume controls of any type is that they always take something away. The advantage designers of preamps have is they can optimize their design for the type of volume control they choose. Unless the user of a passive takes the same care in choosing they will likely end up with poor results.
Herman - enjoyed your post and helpful explainations.
I went to a passive pre - a custom made modded QED unit.
Since my original active pre was a Forte 2, not a stellar performer, the passive mops the floor with the Forte 2 in terms of transparency, space, detail, clarity, neutrality, etc... just worked for me, never thought about impedences etc.
I also enjoyed Hermans post. Though I haven't used a $5000 preamp at home. I do know what musical, dynamic and transparent sounds like. The TVC has been a revelation for me.

I also prepared my setup from the start by using a buffer between the source and the TVC. No worries of impedance or gain issues. In order for me to find an active that can match it across the board would cost thousands...so why bother?

Good listening