Passive preamp vs. powered

Hi Paul,
I don't dispute your point. What I took exception to is the assertion that, because I don't walk lock-step with the majority of the audiophile community in certain subjective values, my opinions are disqualified.

Let me attempt an analogy: I assume that one of the goals of a movie set designer, when constructing models of a set, is to facilitate the audience's "suspension of disbelief". High-definition video, like high-end audio, is concerned with extracting all the recorded information. Consequently, I now find that in some movies, high definition reveals Hollywood's magic tricks. Whereas before I was able to suspend disbelief and see a castle, I now see a plastic model. Likewise in audio, pinpoint imaging can sometimes serve as yet another reminder that I'm listening to a recording.

Good points Phaelon.

I always thought imaging/depth was more based on the recording miking technique used by the recording engineer(s) as can be heard on chesky's ultimate Demonstration disk and I am sure there are others as well.

Hi Phaelon, I do know what you mean about detail that can drive you to distraction, and truly accurate timbre and dynamics are much more important to me then imaging, as I really don't find much imaging in live music, more like a wall of sound. I'm not sure if this is a problem of recording techniques, but I suspect Rleff is right about that, my only point is that if for good or bad, if it is in the recording something might be suspect if the equipment isn't conveying those what is in the recording. Now whether it is in anyway a necessary part of enjoying a musical performance, I would say it is fairly low in my list of priorities. Besides, I never disagree with Clio09:)

Phaelon, quite simply, it sounds to me as if you are after the truth. That is very different from not liking imaging, its all about getting as close to real as possible. Part of the issue of course is hearing recordings made in the spaces that you commonly hear performances in.

A pet peeve of mine does have to do with imaging. In a system that properly retrieves ambient information, the ambient information will make the musicians seem less distinct in the soundfield. So a system that does that might get docked because a lessor system that is unable to retrieve the ambient cues has the images portrayed in a stark fashion. But the system that can portray the ambient information is the one that I would say is 'better', because it has the organic quality that is what you hear in real life.

BTW this is one of the areas that I find a good line stage to outshine any of the passives- PVC or TVC- that ability to reproduce all the low level detail, all the ambient information. However, I have seen a lot of passives beat out active line stages that are not up to snuff, so its no surprise to me that a lot of people might be convinced that passives are ultimately better.