Lightspeed Attenuator - Best Preamp Ever?

What is important for a piece of gear is not great measurements, but great measurements in things that actually correlate to good sounding equipment - not all things measured matter, some really do. In the world of speakers, Floyd Toole and the Canadian acoustic labs actually study which measurements, of what factors actually correlated to subjective preference - in the case of speakers on-axis frequency response correlates very highly and consistently with subjective preference.

I assume there are metrics that relate to amps and preamps that also correlate to subjective preference - 2nd Harmonic distortion? low noise? I don't know. Not sure how the various passives measure, though I imagine they are quieter than actives and have less measured distortion, and that there might be some correlation between these two things and subjective preference (when there is no gain and/or impedance mismatch). I'm not sure that low noise and low distortion in a "preamp" is techno-babble, seems pretty legit, and why they don't work optimally in certain systems is also pretty well understood.

Not sure what being objectively better would mean, unless noise and distortion were in fact the most critical factors determining what is "best" in a line stage (debatable perhaps) - in that case there is a pretty strong argument for passives against actives, At least by that criteria, passives simply measure better in those two (crucial?) parameters.

None of which means that any passive, no matter how good, will sound better to you than a Concert Fidelity in your system, and there may be very good reasons why that is so - (though I doubt objective measurements would be sufficient to explain it).

On the notion of a thread being an advertisement - I don't quite buy that. It may get people talking about a product, but it also exposes you to having people comment that they tried it and it was the most horrible piece of gear they ever heard. Nobody I know of who has tried an LSA would say that (or a BENT Tap for that matter).

Where this thread differs than simply talking up a product, is the fact that what is really of interest to me is the idea of passives in general, and why they may or may not be an ideal method of controlling volume. The secondary issue is whether the Lightspeed approach to passives is the best type of the genre, why (or why not), and under what circumstances.

I have sat in front of many systems that measure great but sound rotten. So, I have no need to help out poor Sam Tellig, just to point out that techno-babble that says the same thing over and over again on this thread does not prove that George's LSA is in some objective way better then active linestages.

Then why reference him? What was the point? Are you just trying to point out someone that has an opinion that agrees with yours? A lot of people do. You're right in some respects our ears are the judge and it's obvious there are quite a few people who prefer the LSA on this thread, for whatever reason they wish. Like you prefer your Black Box but scientifically can't explain why.

If you have an objection to George posting here well deal with it. It isn't the first or last time it will happen on Audiogon. I welcome manufacturers opinions.

Hi Paul,

I believe that you have always been a gentleman who has contributed much to the GON members with your opinions, knowledge, and experience with different pieces of gear.

That's not a setup to now get you, I really believe what I just said, however I think your just a little bit obsessed with the the topic of passives vs active linestages. As you know I have had some of the highest regarded transister and transformer passives in my system and liked them very much. As my taste and ear has evolved I found in the context of my system they did not perform at the same level as great active tube based linestages. As I shared with you in an E-mail I and a few friends auditioned the LSA and found it OK and to my taste not as musical as John Chapman's TAP passive. My remark that you seem a little bit obsessed with this topic is that you state correctly that passives offer great bang for the bucks, what you call stupid/good, that you numerous times restate why they will or might not work for technical reasons which are quite informatice and correct and go into all kinds of nuances why you prefer the LSA in your system. How many times are you going to restate what you have stated over and over again on this your thread until it seems that you are, to me, just wee bit preoccupied with this topic?

You have NEVER said the LSA is for everybody and all systems which I have great respect for, however, good old George has said many times on this thread there is no doubt that his piece is better than any other based on measurements and keeps pushing this assumption in a way that I found quite obnoxious for an AudioGon forum thread.Yes, he states that certain parameters must be meant regarding gain and impedence, but if these are in place there is no reason to ever consider listening anything but his creation. He then goes back to his scientific test of running your CDP straight to your amps being careful not to blow your speakers apart as an objective /scientific test to prove his point. Oh please, you don't say anything like this but he does over and over again to promote his product. This is what I would refer to as an example of technobabble that tries to prove objectively that LSA is superior to all other preamps.

Paul, we both know there is no BEST in our hobby and I don't believe we are even disagreeing about this. I'm not entrenched in an either/or position on passives or active linestages being the best, just how the designer comes across in a way that I find dogmatic, not you, and how many times the same stuff is brought up until it seems like a commercial ad, instead of a thread to educate members about an inexpensive way to get great sound for alot less money.

Especially when you know that an opinion being opined is in fact that of a manufacturer, a dealer, or some other person with a financial interest on the topic - which does not discredit what is being said, but does provide the necessary and expected transparency of where the opiner [?] is coming from.

George thinks he has a great idea, and will argue its merits. Other are free to challenge his technical claims, and others are free to describe their experience with the LSA, good or bad, a revelation or a disappointment. Nothing wrong with that, or public scrutiny....

Hey Clio09,

I get a kick out of your phrase, "well deal with it", as if I'm losing sleep over the drivel that George keeps pushing for his own finacial gain.

I believe that you have entrenched your self in a position for what ever reason to be an advocate for good old George and what ever my opinion is you will attack it and disregarded any information I share. I accept we will never agree, so it's a waste of my time to try to explain anything more to you.

For an example of friendly and good natured rational discourse on this thread, take a look at how I and Paul try to discuss things in a respectful manner even though we do not see eye to eye on some aspects of this topic.

So I'm done with you, Good Day