Are passive preamps better?

Geez, I can't believe people still talk about 600 ohms for any reason. No offense, but that went out with disco...

Interconnects are very important w/passives. Especially where HF is concerned. Keep them as short as possible. In my system however it sounds fine at low volume. In fact I find the HF better at lower volume. This could be due to the extra headroom on my LF amp. I use a Placette resitor ladder. My only source these days is a CDP w/2.5 VRMS@ 50ohms. I feed two amps: both CJ SS w/100K input impedance and the same gain although one is 100WPC (HF) and the other 250WPC (LF) My gear has fairly ideal values for a passive setup which is critical.

I think it is well established that I don't know anything, but if the analogue components could control the cable, then we could not hear the cable. But there is a whole industry based on the fact that cables have a sound. I never understood the reason for this.
I think I'm giving up on the passive linestage for now. Electroid, if you have the ideal components, I think mine are the worst. I've got 1.1V sensitivity@22kohn. And both my players are 2V@10kohm. Not logical. My disposable income went with the stock market, so I'm not in the mood to do a lot of experimenting right now. But I've learned a lot and that's just as much fun. Lynne

Lynne

I've got 1.1V sensitivity@22k ohm

I take that to be the amp's specs, right? I.e. it reaches its peak when fed (a max) of 1,1V & its input impedance is 20kOhm. That's not too bad...

But are you saying your players have an "output impedance" of 10kOhm??? That's too high... I must have misunderstood something.

OTOH, 2V output is more than enough to drive the amp -- and then some. You should be able to use a passive attenuator on it.

(BTW, it's called "impedance" when the "resisting" factor changes with frequency; it's called resistance, when the "resisting" factor remians constant whatever the frequency)

We have a cable industry in high end audio based on the experience of audiophiles hearing differences in the cables.

However most audiophiles don't get that the recording/broadcast industry tackled this problem in the late 1940s and early 1950s, the result being the balanced line system.

For decades, audiophiles listened to inexpensive single-ended gear at home. Single-ended cables do not have a termination standard, so to get around the differences in cables that thus resulted, the cable industry began to develop, starting in the late 1970s, lead by Robert Fulton.

But the balanced line system has the advantage of making an inexpensive balanced cable sound as good or better than the best single ended cable (price no object). The first balanced line audio product was introduced to the high end audio world in 1989, possible because of the increased budget allowed in high end audio, but balanced line has had an uphill battle due to audiophiles not really getting why balanced line is an advantage. I hope my explanation here helps; balanced line exists specifically to eliminate cable problems!

BTW the classic passive volume control problem is lack of bass impact at low volumes. Some controls are built to be very low impedance to try to get around this problem, but that low impedance limits the number of front end products that can work with them.