Are passive preamps better?

Agree with Pubul57,

My response to passive preamps is no.

With passive you have the hardware in the way, volume controls in the way, wire in the way, RCA (or XLR) jacks in the way but you get ZERO benefit.

Zero gain, zero contrast and zero dynamic enhancement from the original signal.

Eldartford

Albertporter...You criticize a lack of "enhancement from the original signal." Wouldn't that be *distortion* of the original signal? Pleasant perhaps, but not "transparent".

I don't consider great gain, improved dynamics, vivid contrast and improved bandwidth as distortion. In fact, that's exactly what I'm looking for in my system.

In our group, tests between state of the art passive against excellent preamps (RE: Manley Steelhead, ARC REF, Aesthetix Callisto, Audio Note, etc) the active always won.

Eldartford,

My exact comment about passives:

Zero gain, zero contrast and zero dynamic enhancement from the original signal.

Isn't zero dynamic enhancement the opposite of improved dynamics?

I don't consider great gain, improved dynamics, vivid contrast and improved bandwidth as distortion.

My meaning was clear and exact in both situations. You seem to be more interested in taxing peoples comment with semantics than contributing to the knowledge base.

Of course "great gain, improved dynamics, vivid contrast and improved bandwidth" is not distortion. But these do not "enhance" (add to) the input signal. They preserve it. Anything added is distortion.

Inaccurate, a preamp always adds something to the signal, it's an amplifier. The question becomes one of improved sound or not.

Albertporter...Just as tube circuits are known to modify the incomming signal by generating harmonics which some think are pleasant, I am suggesting that the extra circuitry of an active preamp may be doing the same thing.

Tube or transistor, both add to the signal, nothing is perfect. It then becomes a question, do the benefits outweigh the negatives?