2. amps-preamps
  3. 1314231744

Is no preamp the best preamp of all?

As an experiment I hooked up my OPPO BDP-95 (which has a volume control) directly to my amp. I was very pleasantly surprised to hear a significant improvement in clarity and sound quality. Typically I have the analog outputs on the OPPO running through my preamp in Analog Direct. I have heard that the circuitry within preamps can cause cross-talk in the analog signal, deteriorating the quality of the signal. So, would having no preamp (and therefore no other circuits to interfere with the signal) be better than an expensive analog or digital preamp running in Analog Direct? I am not really interested in Room Correction or DSP of any kind. I was considering purchasing a Bel Canto PRe6 (which I've read is excellent for multichannel analog), but would it be better to just have the OPPO running directly to the power amp?
128x128cdj123
mitch2
3,759 posts
 
I believe the wide range of reported successes and failures of passive attenuation is based on the many variations in matching sources and amplifiers. Arthur Salvatore writes about this on his website (Link:http://www.high-endaudio.com/RC-Linestages.html#Int) and summarizes with;
In short, if you need an active line stage because your source is not up to the task of driving the amplifier(s), then...

Any good active line stage, from any era, will improve the sonics in some obvious and clear manner.

Alternatively, if your source is up to the task of driving your amp(s), then...

No active line stage, no matter how good it is, will ever equal the sonics of your direct connection (or an equivalent passive).

Regarding digital volume control, here is an interesting paper by Daniel Weiss;
http://www.weiss-highend.ch/computerplayback/Digital_Level_Control.pdf
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,239 posts
 
Arthur Salvatore has updated and revised his opinion since he auditioned ans subsequently purchased the active Coincident Statemnet Linestage a few months ago. He now believes for the vast majority(with rare exception) a superior active is preferred.
mitch2
3,759 posts
 
Charles1dad, I do too, or at the very least I would recommend a preamp with buffering to improve impedance matching as well as to control interconnects. This is why I doubt I will give up my preamp even if I were to purchase a DAC with volume control.
daverz
487 posts
 
I agree that many issues with passives are probably impedance issues. Inline attenuators will also reduce your effective input impedance.

It would help if more amps had adjustable sensitivity so that less attenuation was needed for the high output voltage of most DACs and CDPs (which is one reason why I got the original Neko DAC with the 1V output).
pubul57
3,712 posts
 
I am trying to draw conclusions from AS two statements:

"No active line stage, no matter how good it is, will ever equal the sonics of your direct connection (or an equivalent passive)."

"He now believes for the vast majority(with rare exception) a superior active is preferred."

Perhaps if you are the rare exception (me?) no active line stage can beat a passive -- the very same thing Roger Modjeski told me, though he did not think it was all that "rare" that a passive preamp would be the volume control of choice. Which does not mean I'm not going to get another active tube line stage to switch with my Lightspeed Attenuator from time to time.
More to discover