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
No need to get defensive Grannyring. I didn't say it was a waste of money for your system. I've read your thread on the Dude preamp and almost bought one. BTW, I have a stepped resistor attenuator in my amp, not a volume pot...a big difference in sound quality, IME.
I would have to agree with Ralph of Atma-Sphere..."If you have the passive control in the amp then you can make it work and it will be difficult to find a preamp that will do better." This coming from a guy who designed the MP-1, one of the best tube preamps I've heard.
I could be wrong, but most integrated have active preamp built into it, and they usually use cheap pots, not stepped attenuators. And integrated usually have switching capability for multiple inputs and even balance control...all of these degrades the signal. However, I've seen some tube integrated with a rudimentary pot at the input stage. My tube amps are mono blocks so I have stepped attenuator for each amp which can also serve as balance...probably the best way to set up balance control.
It did`nt seem(to me) as though Grannyring was defensive.Just pointing out this topic has many previous threads with the same results. There`ll always be two camps and I don`t believe that will ever change.As he says what ever works out best case by case.
Regards,