Are passive preamps better?

Newbee, I didn't mean to insinuate that those with tube amps would prefer a passive preamp. I've owned tube and SS amps and have always preffered active preamps myself. What I was saying is that I have noticed that most of the fans of passive preamps are using tube amps. It's very rare to find a fan of passive preamp with SS amps. Just something that I've noticed.
Since Lynne is using a SS amp, I would think a active preamp would be the obvious choice. To more directly answer the question:

Does a passive preamp with transformers so that its impedence can be matched with an amplifier have the potential to provide better sonics than a line preamp?

I would say yes, the potential does exist. However cable, source and amp matching would still make it very difficult to realize better sonics. IMHO.

Cheers,
John

Jmcgrogan2 - you hit something there. Tube amps typically have very high input impedance, much higher than the typical SS amp, and this is why passives work better with them.

However, in almost all cases at least, a very good active pre will eclipse any passive. The passives all somehow lose body and drive.

Another vote for active. I've owned a couple of passive units which sounded so "clean and open" on initial hook up I was impressed. But ultimate lack of drive and dynamics always caused me to return to an active unit.

There is one significant value to owning an inexpensive passive unit (can be assembled with <$15 for a stereo pot, two pair of female RCA jacks, some wire and a small box) -- that is to test the transparency of any "active" preamp under audition. A good unit should be as open sounding (lacking in distortion) as the test mule passive box.

Also, I agree with Sam Tellig that a "passive preamp" is an oxymoron term.

Eldartford

Albertporter...You criticize a lack of "enhancement from the original signal." Wouldn't that be *distortion* of the original signal? Pleasant perhaps, but not "transparent".

I don't consider great gain, improved dynamics, vivid contrast and improved bandwidth as distortion. In fact, that's exactly what I'm looking for in my system.

In our group, tests between state of the art passive against excellent preamps (RE: Manley Steelhead, ARC REF, Aesthetix Callisto, Audio Note, etc) the active always won.

I'm suprised that at least the with this group, it seems more like 80/20 for the active - not that it necessarily means anything, but it does seems to be some form of consensus amongst different listeners who have experience with both approaches; but eventually, you really have to try it to know if the passive works for you.