Are there passive attenuators that don't zero volume and only offer one input ?

±0.1VDC 1mVDC ripple is hardly anything to sneeze at.
Thyristors make gawdawful noise when switching. Pointless to control current in a device using a few mA.
Quit digging.

Let him go ieales, never have I met such a persistent BS'er as him, for years now on many forums trying to make a quick buck from the gullible, he’ll self implode one day.

Cheers George

I don't recognize any of the model numbers nor the technologies, but you guys seem to know a lot about passives. I have never tried a passive preamp, but i have been researching a Townsend Allegri Reference passive preamp to replace my massive two box ARC REF10 solution. Are I in the same ball park of Passives? Can anyone tie the more technical part of the discussion to if the Townsend Allegri REF to see if it might work in my system as a passive. All I run is a DAK/Streamer to monos and onto my Wilson speakers I'm digital as the only input, no balance control needed, nor  TT or other inputs needed, I just need balanced output, a volume control and a remote control. Any advice for a newbe from the Passive camp as I'm just seeing If there room for my questions and ideas.

Although the contributors seem very knowledgeable about passive control preamps I don't know if this is a good place to ask if the  Townsend passive Allegri Reference  preamp is the type of technology you understand and support and the type company and sound to consider replacing an ARC REF 10 preamp with the Allegri. I don't use a balance control, but have to have a remote, and only need an inbound balanced in and a balanced out. Is anyone up to speed on the Allegri reference and willing  to relate it's pros and cons to the other approaches you were describing, and then the replacement of an ARC 10 with it. If this question is too off base just say hello and move on Thanks.

±0.1VDC 1mVDC ripple is hardly anything to sneeze at.
Thyristors make gawdawful noise when switching. Pointless to control current in a device using a few mA.

No thyristors are ideal in this circuit as they exhibit much better complete switching. 

As you well know There are hundreds if not thousands of thyristors , each with different characteristics suiting different purpose, To which do you refer ?

The main advantage with thyristors  in rectifier circuits as you should know,  is to conduct current only in one direction,this suits when the load requires  DC. A diode in comparison always has a forward voltage droprelated to temperature so is always incomplete with its switching. In so doing it creates what is called dark current, also called reverse bias leakage current.  

With thyristors they too can exhibit forward voltage, however is related to the junction current,  With 3ma being the load that does just not occur, But if large current is the load seen by internal junctions then the thyristor does such transfer to exhibit forward voltage drop slowly.

Another major asset being that a thyristor is a  controlled device vs uncontrolled

Back to the topic, who agrees passives should be able to zero volume and have more than one input.

Back to the topic, who agrees passives should be able to zero volume and have more than one input.

These are trivial features and not important to me. What is important is that the passive preamp is well designed and gets out of the way. If in doing so it can zero volume and have more that one input fine, if not that is fine too.

As I stated previously I have had many passive preamps in my system. Some zero volume and have multiple inputs, some were made by manufacturers and some I DIYed. In the end the Lightspeed Attenuator which doesn't zero volume and has only one input is the one that I keep coming back to. One of the best bargains in audio and one of the best purchases I have ever made.

Not an issue to me.  I just had a passive built for me that purposely had only one input for purposes of SQ because it takes one switch out of the signal path.  If the volume doesn't go to zero then a mute switch would work fine.  I run mine in front of a unity-gain buffer and having remote control of volume, and an easy to read display, were more important to me.

There is no doubting LDR passives for sound quality are the bargain of the century, surpassing every other device you can name.

I am unsure if everyone would put up with one input and not being able to zero volume, particularly knowing that those two aspects can be solved.

The product  IMO must surpass with its features too, ideally one step ahead in all departments, making it irresistible. 

@dbxrecord who cares. This has been a pretty useless thread. You are obviously trying to take a poke at another manufacturer's product with the hope you will get gobs of people to agree with your point of view while pimping your products feature set. Obviously it's not happening so give it a rest. People can make whatever decision they need to regarding the features they desire in an LDR preamp, or any preamp for that matter. I've made mine and I'm not looking back.

Not at all, if you check back through each post I have not mentioned other manufacturers product name, or personal names,  and I have also avoided,  as best I can,  stating my own. This page being the exception.

Think of other manufacturers of passives, rather than the one you refer to, and it all begins to make sense.  

Let's hope things improve, so all passive manufacturers move forward  & cater for features that make passives, the only choice. 

To refute the libel being saturated by one forum member in this thread,

Forgive me, haven't been following this thread so maybe this is explained elsewhere. But how exactly do you saturate libel? 

That is easy, just carefully read each post, and refer to your dictionary for the meaning of the word.