Modern Linestages


This is a general question about how complex and expensive some linestages have become. I'm looking to understand why? I can grasp that really good volume controls are complicated and that equally good switches are not inexpensive. I also have a general understanding of the importance of a high quality power supply, which again is not going to come cheap. I just don't comprehend how you get to a 50lbs. plus preamps that cost well over $20k. Is this level of complexity really needed or is it the equivalent of the spate of 500hp "sedans" for every day driving?
128x128onhwy61
"08-22-11: "Unsound
While I understand that passive pres are more system dependent than active pres, I find it interesting that some would suggest that simpler is better and yet choose a system that doesn't maximize the potential for a passive pre.Unsound"

You can try this experiment yourself, put your cd straight into your poweramp and play a known quiet starting disc, so you can stop it before it gets too loud.
This is the purest way you will hear that disc, any active pre in the system will sound different to this as no active pre is a straight wire with gain, they all have a signature to their sound, call it coloured, or distortion they all sound different, none sound like the direct conection between the source and poweramp. The passive pre will if implemented right sound the closest and the truest to the source. You may not like that purity of sound, you may wish to introduce an active preamp that gives you the colouration your seeking to counteract a problem elsewhere in the system, but this is an expensive band-aid fix

Cheers George
George you are correct that each active pre brings it's own sound to the stage but let's take it to the next step! Every amp, speaker, cable, line conditioner, room treatment and so on moves one system differently so by going with an active pre vs. a passive is just a different flavor of ice cream. You might like chocolate while I like coffee. As I stated personally I have found passive pre's to sound wonderful but they do have their faults and now use an active pre and have never looked back. Maybe some day I'll have the good fortune to try yours, would love to hear it.
Steve
SOS
The really wonderful aspect of this hobby is the ability to put things to the test.If you trust your ears, you can judge/test the theories and listen to what happens.You can say a good passive is truer to the source and that active devices simply add "colorations"(pleasing or not). You could certainly conclude also that the passive units are`nt passing the"complte" signal,thus there`s some degree of subtraction of musical information.What one person would say is a clean and pure(uncolored) signal is in reality just an incomplete one and thus sounds leaner,flatten,thin and lacks dynamics and vitality. The active unit may just do a superior job of preserving the original signal(less degradation) so that tone and dynamics are`nt as comprrimised. This would explain(at least to me) why the really good active linestages sound more real and involving rather than stripped down and less involving.
Charles1dad, I have made that same point in a different thread as it seems very reasonable and reality based on my experience with systems well matched for a passive.

Let's just say several on that thread left no room for such reasoning and maintain a passive under ideal circumstances is the gold standard - period. No room to think different. My involement in that thread was not fun and I simply went home with my ball. Hope we don't see that happen again here. I like this topic and would love more open minded discussion.
Let's just say several on that thread left no room for such reasoning and maintain a passive under ideal circumstances is the gold standard - period. No room to think different.

I think you're being a bit unreasonable with this statement Bill. Sure your opinions were questioned and judgements refuted. That happens in these forums. IIRC there was a robust discussion of the philosophical meaning of "true to the source" and it was clear your definition was different than than majority, but there were others in your camp as well.

I'd venture to say that all of us on the thread you referenced have started out our audiophile lives with active preamps. Some of us have had many come in and out of our systems. That some of us now prefer passive preamps for their simplicity and sound comes from our own comparisons and formulation of opinions. Our convictions were just as passionate in regards to what we prefer (and what is our gold standard) as are yours when it comes to discussing your Dude preamp, your preferences, and your gold standard. When you spoke of no room for reasoning, if that is truly what you felt then I'd say it cut both ways. As you stated yourself, you took your ball home, nobody forced you too.

Getting back to this topic, Unsound said it best. If you believe in simplicity one might consider building their system to maximize the potential to use a passive preamp. It's really not that hard to do and certainly cheap enough to try. Whether its the sound your prefer is another matter altogether.