Are passive preamps better?

I prefer active preamps. I've tried a few passives, but they never seem to work for me. That being said, I've noticed that many who like passive's also have tube amps. I cannot say that I have tried a passive with tube amps, so it may be a possibility.

Cheers,
John

Newbee, I didn't mean to insinuate that those with tube amps would prefer a passive preamp. I've owned tube and SS amps and have always preffered active preamps myself. What I was saying is that I have noticed that most of the fans of passive preamps are using tube amps. It's very rare to find a fan of passive preamp with SS amps. Just something that I've noticed.
Since Lynne is using a SS amp, I would think a active preamp would be the obvious choice. To more directly answer the question:

Does a passive preamp with transformers so that its impedence can be matched with an amplifier have the potential to provide better sonics than a line preamp?

I would say yes, the potential does exist. However cable, source and amp matching would still make it very difficult to realize better sonics. IMHO.

Cheers,
John

01-07-08: Arnettpartners
Pubul57, Thanks. I'll check it out. If I spent that much I would have to never tell anyone. Lynne

That's part of being in this hobby Lynne..........we take our secrets to the grave...... :)

Cheers,
John

I'm sure there are differences between passives, just as there are differences between actives.
I have to ask though.....why?
Even though most here have recommended active preamps, you seem predisposed to passives. So why even ask? Just go ahead and buy the passive and form your own opinion, the same way the rest of us did.

Cheers,
John

uuummmmmmmm....tubessss.....now you're talking.....
If 2 channel is your deal, your really should try tubes. Warm up those cold MN nights. :)
Especially since you have such great tube companies up there in MN, like Atma-sphere and Audio Research Corporation.

There's a first time for everything. If you're shy, it's probably best to start with a tube preamp, as there is less maintenance and tube replacement is less expensive.
A word of warning though, you may find tubes highly addictive, and there is no turning back.

My wife, who is by no means an audiophile, makes very few comments about items coming and going in my system. Most of them aesthetically based, and negative. In the 25 years we've been together, there has been only a couple of times when she has said that something sounds real, and yup, you guessed it, it's always revolved around tube components. Not cables/cords, not cd players/turntables, not preamps/amps, not even speakers. Only tubed components, and sometimes she cannot see the tubes and doesn't even know they are there.
There have only been about 2 or 3 comments in the last 25 years. She says they just sound real, and I agree.
Oddly enough though, she does hate the looks of tube amps with exposed tubes, but she doesn't complain once she hears them.

Cheers,
John

The ARC LS-7 listed for $1395 when introduced in 1995, so that price seems to fall in line with used older gear. Some of ARC's older gear has higher resale value, like the SP-10 or SP-11. These sell for almost $2K and are over 20 years old.

Cheers,
John

In theory I totally agree with you Aleko. However, when using my ears as a guide, I've consistantly found that active preamps sound more musical to me. IMS, IMHO, YMMV.

Cheers,
John

Well I wasn't really saying that age is more of a factor for SS gear than for tube gear. What I was saying is that the the asking price of used gear does not reflect how old an item is. In other words, it's not strictly a case of the cheaper an item is the older it is. Used prices tend to reflect whether an older component has reached 'classic' status vs. just getting old.

Certainly their are 'classic' SS pieces too, like Threshold SA-1 amps, Mark Levinson ML-2 amps, Classe DR-9 amps these units are SS and have reached 'classic' status, thereby holding very good resale value even though they are 20 years old.

Cheers,
John