Lightspeed Attenuator - Best Preamp Ever?

Have enjoyed reading this thread from the very start, so here's my take on the Lightspeed Attenuator:

1) I and a follow group listners auditioned it in a very high end system and thought it was good but nothing earth shattering, I had shared this with Paul I believe with a voice mail or E-mail, that its sonic performance was not a significant or qualitative shift over the sonics of other great passives which I have used as references such as the Bent Tap TVC or the Placette buffered. I choose not to put the results of this auditioning experience on this thread for two reasons. I had a hunch it would be dismussed by some of the true believers in the Lightspeed because of this or that, impedence mismatch or something else, not fully broken in, which power supply, etc. Secondly, this is not Paul's position, well that's just your personnal taste anyways. Absolutely, personnal taste and system synergy is and will always be present. My system just does not offer the same illusion of real music with any passive including the Lightspeed compared with a reference tube based linestage.

2) It's the price dummy, it's the price! Yes, I totally agree with the permise that this piece offers tremendous valve for the money, even if it's no better then the above mentioned passives which I have used as references at different times in my system, it still costs thousands of dollars less! However, that does not mean, taking out the performance vs cost ratio, that it ranks as one of the world's great linestages because it stills lacks what great active tube linestages have to offer in my opinion. I have no worries regarding heat or tubes wearing out.

3) I have nothing but respect, trust, and kind feelings towards the man who started this thread, Paul, who writes extremely well and helps spread very interesting and useful information here on the GON. Happy new year Paul. However, if I did not know better, and I do, I would think that Paul is either George's private partner, owns lots of shares in George's company, or finally gets a piece of the action. Now none of this is true, please, I'm trying to make an attempt at humor and Paul, if you take what I just stated seriuosly, I apologize in advance. However, George should be very greatful, this thread at times comes across to me like an unpayed advertisement or a missionary message to Gon members to save us from ourself's regarding the slippery slope of performance vs cost ratio. I know it's a flaming bargain!, but how many times is it necessary to state this over and over again. It's makes perfact sense that George has an invested interest regarding his baby, I think him taking the time to help out on this thread with useful information regarding how to maximize your Lightspeed's performance is terrific, but please you have not invented the "sonic wheel", even though you offer a great product at a very reasonable price. I do totally accept that you have a position regarding what a linestage should offer sonicly in one's system, however your take, is no more right or wrong then my take or anyone's else's. It's personnal taste not an objective measure in the long run in this hobby. It just seems to me, and I understand why, George, is stating to come across as a salesman on this thread.

Well, that's my take on this marathon discussion, it's always fun to see what the next post will be, so I'll keep reading this thread, but I'm keeping my tube based linestage for now, even though it would be great to save so much money, but just don't like passives in my system any more, but the Lightspeed might be great for you in your system!

There is something to be said for those that have a conviction and stick by it. I have a lot of respect for what George did with the LSA because he has determined what he feels a preamp should accomplish, and while I agree that his way is no more right or wrong than anyone else, he has developed a product based on his conviction regardless of the fact he could have probably made more money developing active linestages had he chosen to go down that path.

Its like Ralph Karsten's approach and his conviction about using output transformers in amp circuits. He is in the minority among his peers (even though his research and papers do a great job explaining why his approach may be the better one), but he keeps plugging away at it when IMO it probably would have been easier for him to just design a circuit with output transformers and call it a day.

Lightspeed ahead...

Tube test complete - no ringing or any bad noises at all. Listened to Van and enjoyed it lots!

I have rolled quite a few 6sn7's in my active preamp over the past two years and have never had a microphonic tube issue as an fyi.

Knghifi, funny stuff.

Hi Clio09, I too have great respect for Ralph Karsten's designs and his passion for what makes the most sense to him sonicly and design wise.

However, I have no awareness historically that he ever "pushed" his design/product on an Audiogon thread like it seems to me that George is doing now on this one. Please I'm not referring to the information to help members understand his design or optimize its performance, but it seems to me that he really believes that his piece is the "BEST" there can be in linestage.

Your other remark that George, "proably could have made more money developing an active linestage", but chose not to because of his conviction to this design is not only pure conjuncture on your part, but kinda silly that he rather make less money then more from a business sense.His use of the LED design instead of transformers or resistors is quite interesting, but does not put him, in my opinion, in the patheon of designers like Ralph Karsten, Nelson Pass, or Masataka Tsuda.

So, I still believe that the way this piece is being "marketed" on this thread or how George comes across in his "conviction" that his linestage is the "BEST" regarding his design is quite different then anything Ralph Karsten has ever done on any Audiogon forum.

I think Terry is a very gifted listener and reviewer with exposure to some of the finest equipment in the world and have nothing but respect for his observations and conclusions about his views on equipment, but though we have owned similar equipment at different times, I think we lean towards a different kind of sound and we might not come to the same conclusions - though I have no doubt I would love his system. He might be right that part of my enthusiasm is in part what the LSA does for the $$$, though I would have no problem buying a more expensive line stage if I wanted to, but ultimately I think it is simply that the LSA works really well in my system and after quite of bit of A/B I felt it offered just as much musical pleasure as my tube linestage, which up to that point was my favorite after several years of listening to various preamps, a line stage with Terry also heard but wasn't exactly his cup of tea.

Still, I do the "best" concept really makes no sense, it makes no sense universally, independent of system context, not does it make sense to any particular listener. But it sure does make sense to try an LSA to see it how it works for you and then decide for yourself.

Ralph Karsten and Nelson Pass? You are right, they are at the very top of world class design talent, as is Roger Modjeski in my view, who also is in the passive line stage camp feeling no active line stage would better for use with his RM10 MKII and RM9 SE amps. Now, while Roger sells a $135 Pot-in-a-Box with a very high quality Noble pot, I think George has simply built a better mousetrap by avoiding a physical connection to change resistor values.

I think there is more debate about active versus passage than between the SS/tube divide in that even within the very same listener one might find ambivalence of conviction over which approach is best over time. I've made that journey several times, the allure of tubes is always there, but at least for me, the Music Reference amps have never sounded better than through the LSA.