Preamps waste of money?


I've been forced to reevaluate the role of preamps. The best sound I have achieved is result of adding a stepped resistor volume control at the input stage inside of my tube amp. All other options I have tried or auditioned including both active and passive volume control(autoformer and LDRs)have "colored" the sound in one way or the other to an unacceptable degree compared the stepped attenuator at the input. Has anyone had similar experience?
dracule1
I've also tried DACT attenuator in an amp I owned long ago, but I wasn't as successful. For some reason, the Goldpoint works exceptionally well in my current amp.
Oh yea, I also had the Hovland HP-100 in my system.

I also auditioned the Ayre KXR preamp at a dealer. I guess I'm really not into active SS preamps. There always seems to be some residual thinness to the sound from a SS preamp, no matter how expensive, that a good tube preamp avoids. But that's just me. Others might describe the thinness as neutral, but I don't hear that in real life. I haven't heard the dartZeel, which according to some, is the cat's meow.
Dracule1,
I agree with you, thin and lean is`nt neutral, just another aberration. Real insruments and voices are full bodied and complete, not washed out and dry.For example a live tenor saxaphone sounds big and is full of tone and color.Some preamps seem to strip away the fullness and sound perhaps only 70-80% complete with less weight and presence.This is`nt a natural sound IMO.The really good tube preamps just seem to get it closer to the truth.
Regards,
Precisely charlsdad. I used to own a modded Threshold SA-30 class A amp. It did not have the thinness (still miss it), but it didnt have the harmonic richness of a good tube amp. I always feel I'm missing something with SS. Of course tube amplification has its problems too, but I rarely feel like I'm missing out on musical aspects that are important to me.