Importance of line stage pre--Who Knew?


Well, I'm sure a lot of you knew, or there would be no $5K and up market for line stages.

As for me... This month marks the 40th anniversary of buying my first stereo with my own money. In all that time I've only had solid state in the signal chain except for a Jolida phono preamp and matching line stage I picked up a couple of years ago. It turns out that the tubes in those units were for a buffer stage to warm up the sound, while the gain was handled by op amps. Well, recently an audio buddy came by to spin some vinyl and show me a tube-driven line stage preamp he wanted to sell.

See it here.

This is just a simple, modest line stage preamp with 5-input rotary selection knob, balance, and volume. Five pairs of inputs, one fixed and two volume-controlled pairs of outputs on the back. However, it's a PTP hand-wired design with tube rectifier and large transformer. I didn't want to like it as it had a couple of deal-killers: 1) no remote control and 2) too tall to fit on my audio rack thanks to that outsize transformer. It would have to be a game-changer for me to consider getting it.

We tried it out in the humblest of circumstances. I set it on a Rubbermaid step stool in front of my rack and patched it into the signal path, bypassing the Jolida op amp/tube buffer line stage.

HOLY MOLY!

Game changer? Sh'yeah! After just a few seconds of hearing it you know it's not leaving the house. So what did it do?

It simply sounded more real and less electronic. It heightened the illusion of performers in real space making music. It took my system a big step away from a tune player to a sonic virtual reality device. Sonically the difference might be considered subtle, but in the realm of emotional response to the music, it was a big step. There was more separation between the various elements of the mix, and if you sat in the sweet spot between the speakers, you heard a 3-dimensional image of performers spread out before you. That physical separation also separates into audible separation. It was easier to hear how the musicians interact with each other to make music together--just like in a live performance. Instead of an amorphous left-to-right smear there was a sonic hologram of where the performers stood in the mix. However, this did not desconstruct the performance, but rather showed how the elements worked together to form ensemble music.

Timbres sounded more real: Brass had more blat when called for, more sense of air flowing through metal, of lungs full of air providing the energy for the resulting sound. Strings sounded pluckier, voices more human, acoustic instruments woodier... you get the picture. It made LPs sound enveloping with a nicely laid-out soundstage, and it elevated computer-based digital music from tolerable to involving and enjoyable, again with the 3-D imaging and wider-than-the-speakers sound stage.

Before picking up this piece, I was thinking of upgrading amplifiers yet another time. But I experienced a valuable lesson I had previously known more in theory--that for fine gradations of amplitude, tubes rule, and it's the low level--preamp and component level--signals that are most fragile; if part of the signal drops out at that stage, no amplifier will bring it back regardless of the amp's bandwidth, rise time, signal-to-noise ratio, or resolving power. The preamp has to caress and amplify those low level signals and pass them on to the amplifier so you can groove to them when they exit the speakers. Since all my sources--LP, CD, FM, iPod, and computer--run through this unit, everything sounds better,

In fact, one of the things I learned from this experience is that my $220 used 1981 Heathkit amplifier is even better than I thought. Paired with this preamp, it is still superb. Sure there are better and much better. But for now and some time to come, it'll do nicely.

Since picking it up I swapped in a set of Sylvania NOS tubes--a JAN (mil-spec) 6X5WGT rectifier (smoother delivery and better voltage regulation) and a matched set of '50s-era Sylvania 6SN7GTB triodes (even more liquidity, less grain, more 3-D imaging). I'm a happy man. Next up--sell off some electronics and get a tube phono stage from this maker.
johnnyb53

11-08-12: W3ux
Zd542 - The person that started this thread said he was using a modest line stage,
I'm the OP and when I said it was a "modest" line stage I meant that it was very simply built, no gilded tube cage, no Italian styling, no 1/4" thick face plate, no ceramic/polymer hybrid footers, no remote control. However, as far as features that count sonically--excellent circuit design, rugged components, PTP wiring, oversize transformer and tube rectification, ceramic sockets, high quality panel-mounted RCA plugs--it has a build quality to rival line stages up to at least $2500 and maybe $4000.

If your computer source is as good as you can afford(I'm using a Mac Mini with pure music) and has adequate gain, a preamp is not necessary, you will lose detail and transparency.

Yet somehow this line stage is able to caress very low level signals and amplify them intact, and do no damage to high treble signals, such that everything I run through it sounds better, whether sourced from CD player, phono preamp (from turntable) or my Audirvana-driven iTunes.

You do have a point though; the guy I bought it from is replacing it with a transformer-driven passive preamp. Rather than attenuating via variable resistor values it's handled by a multiple-tapped transformer to provide the attenuation while preserving--and even enhancing--signal strength.

My power amp has attenuators for each channel, so I *could* plug into it directly, but the attenuators are on the back panel and I'd have to shut off the amp, wait 20 seconds, and then manually change interconnects every time I wanted to switch sources. Having the right line stage instead is easily worth it to me.
Unexpectedly fixing the bottleneck in your system for $500 makes for a super day. I know I - and probably a lot of others - have had that transformational improvement going from a bad to a good preamp.
W3ux,

I didn't mean to suggest that your preamp, or anyone else's, for that matter, is not good. Quicksilver makes great products. I think the V4's were one of the best sounding amps I've ever herd. I only meant to say that while their preamps are very good, you can spend more money on other products, and get more of the "audiophile" characteristics some people want. More detail, better imaging, dynamic contrast, are all things that can improve as you go up. I didn't mean to offend in any way.

There was mention of using a passive preamp/line stage by some of the other posters. Whoever it was that brought them up, I'm with you. If you don't have a lot of money to go for a really good active preamp, I wouldn't hesitate to get one. You can get truly excellent results with a passive. There are a lot of people who have tried them and didn't like the results, though. I think a lot of that has to do with the source. Since there is no gain on a passive, the job of amplifying the signal is on your sources. If you are using a cheap, mass market CD player, for example, it probably won't sound good because of because of the poor output sections in those types of products. If you have a better CD player with a good output stage, that should eliminate any problems.