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 just been through this process myself. I'm a great fan of TVC passives as they really provide a detailed uncoloured sound for a relatively small amount of money. I've used a SAC TVC, briefly used a Music First Mk II and recently a StereoKnight Silverstone B&R. The choice seems to be between detail or energy until you reach a particular quality point. Unfortunately my experience is that this is quite expensive. I finally have found the detail that I have had from the StereoKnight or Music First but with the power and control of an active. It has cost me though.
I've been curious about many aspects of this thread for some time. I use a NAD M51 DAC as a source and preamp straight to my SS amp through balanced interconnects. I've tried using an active SS preamp before but I always loose something in the process and i end up removing the active preamp. I'm intrigued what a tubed preamp such as something from Balanced could contribute to the system since it accepts XLR inputs and outputs. The mix of SS and Tube gear is said to work well with my Thiels. However I can't get over the thought that when it comes to gear less is more and why would adding something else in the chain of information make it better and not worse. It would seem the more components added In the signals line the more the original signal is changed. For this reason passive preamps intrigue me too since it would seem they would render less change to the signal than an active preamps. But I'm not an electrical engineer, so take my ramblings as such.
Last lemming,
I share the same philosophy and mind set for simplicity. But only to the point where this route does`nt begin to compromise or subtract from the music.

Not every active preamp is good and some of the better passives I`d prefer.However once you find a'very good' active preamp it delivers more of the complete music signal(dynamics,weight,nuance,scale etc.)The overall effect is more emotion, soul and involvement(visceral) just my own experience.

It`d be good if you could compare these different appraoches and hear for youself(I know, easier said than done).For me music is about connecting emotionally rather the than cool detachment and observation aspect.I enjoy my current system`s music reproduction so much that I seldom watch the TV any more.I just love the beauty of music.
Regards,
The residual thinness you think you hear from S.S. preamps is the lack of coloration you get with all tube components. The thinnest, most sterile systems I've heard had no preamp.

Tmsorosk, this statement is incorrect. Tube preamps can be quite uncolored- for example our own preamps are fully differential, and that topology means that it does not generate any 2nd ordered harmonic distortion (coloration) that tubes are often accused of. OTOH, much of the thinness I hear in transistors has to do not so much with their bass response, but the fact that they make odd ordered harmonic distortion (in trace amounts), which is the thing to which the human ear is the most sensitive. Tube preamps generally lack this type of coloration.

With regards to the topic of this thread, although an inboard attenuator works quite well in a power amp, for the most part its impractical unless you have a very austere setup. Changing volume for example means getting up and doing two controls, if you have to mess with channel balance its a further pain, let alone what you do if you have more than one source. Of course, the exercise is likely good for you...

I keep the sources for my system in a place in the room where there is the least vibration (which happens to be about 5 feet from the listening chair). Its not between the speakers. So the interconnects to do the job are 30 feet long. This allows the source components to be in the best location in the room to minimize microphonics (especially noticeable at higher volume levels on most systems, with my setup, the system is impervious, unperturbed and relaxed at any volume). In addition I use custom stands and platforms to assist with that.

None of my sources can drive 30 feet of cable, but the preamp does that with ease and without coloration. I concede that Dracule1 has probably got his setup to work great with only one input, but its not something I would want in my setup at all- in my case the preamp is worth every penny and is indispensable!
Ralph, I have two digital sources and don't mind switching interconnects between the two, which I only do once in couple of months. Getting up from the chair to change volume and balance can be PITA, but I've gotten use to it. However, I have a solution...I'm getting remote controlled stepper motor for my Goldpoint attenuator that can adjust volume and balance. Two stepper motors, two Goldpoint mono attenuators, and control logic board including the hand held remote cost me about $500. Obviously you have install them yourself or pay someone to do it for you. I can't conceive of getting equal performance, unless I'm prepared to dish out serious money for a remote controlled preamp (ie, $15k+). It's mind boggling to me when I consider the amount of money I would have to spend on an external preamp to equal this simple setup in my system.