Best Preamp and Amp combination, interesting finding!!!


Hi all,

Yesterday, I decided to conduct a very interesting experience using my amp and preamp combinations. In the interest of fair discussion and also avoiding brand war, please allow me to conceal the name of the amps and preamps, knowing that both amps and preamps came from the same manufactures. The combinations are as below: 

Combination 1 (C1): $3000 preamp + $1000 amp
Combination 2 (C2): $1000 preamp + $3000 amp.

I went back and forth between C1 and C2 several times with multiple people, using the same speakers and DAC. The volume of both C1 and C2 was adjusted to be equal using my Db meter. 
At the end of the experience, almost everyone including me prefers C1. Which is a higher-end preamp combined with the lower-end amp. 
I was surprised by that finding. I always thought that the amp has a greater impact to sound quality, but my experiment proved otherwise. If you have any similar experiences, please let me know. I would like to understand why it happens that way. Why the preamp has a greater impact on the overall sound quality comparing to the amp?
128x128viethluu

Showing 1 response by barjohn

Unless you are dealing with analog input such as a tape or vinyl the best preamp is no preamp.  Keeping the signal digital and in the digital domain into a digital power amp where it is converted to analog for your speakers will produce the best possible sound.

All of this ignores the elephant in the room where thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars are spent on equipment while ignoring the biggest factor and that is the quality of the recording.  The producer/engineer at the sound board (when recording in studio) can destroy the result by mike placement, quality of mikes, how the signals are mixed and amplitude and tone controls of each channel mixed.  Very few engineers go for the simple but acoustically more accurate binaural recording.  They can't resist panning or boosting what they like and burying what they don't like.  Add to that problem the fact that most are listening to monitors that tend to be bass heavy or light and that influences what they hear and how they adjust the recording and you get a lot of crap and then audiophiles interpret what they are hearing without knowing how it was recorded.

I was friends with the owner of a high end usia store in Miami when I lived there in the 80s and he used to also be a recording engineer.  The work he would undertake to properly record a symphony orchestra (The New. World Symphony) to recreate the environment and the sense of having the best seat in the house was astounding.  Mikes were suspended on wires just above the best seats in the place and care was taken to preserve the sense of space and location of instruments with their natural timbre intact and to capture as wide a dynamic range as possible.  The difference between those recordings and ones where mikes are placed throughout the orchestra and mixed was night an day.

You may have noticed in listening to many modern recordings, especially noticeable in recording of symphonies where you know the instruments locations, I find it very annoying that during part of the recording the violins are on the left (usual location) and other parts, especially if it is a video recording, as the camera pans and moves the location of the instruments move.  For me it destroys the illusion of capturing a live performance.  

My son was a recording artist and I have gone into studio to observe recording sessions and seen first hand how the engineer can dramatically alter the recording as they think it is their job to put their artistic signature on the recording rather than capturing the best possible rendition of what is being played.