2. amps-preamps
  3. 167931-90138

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
richopp
760 posts
 
@ sheridanmartinj

Interesting how that happens, right?

I remember getting the "A-1" parts from ARC in a small envelope and soldering them into the SP3's we sold.  I forget--4-6 parts, I think, but that may be wrong.  It was 1976-77 as I remember, so quite a while ago.

Anyway, that pre-amp kind of picked up what Saul Marantz had accomplished with his 7 and pushed the barriers to such an extent that I think, personally, it spawned a lot of work on pre-amps over the years.  

Today, there are many great pre-amps out there.  I cannot afford an SP3, but purchased an SP6 recently and it really made my Maggies come alive again after years of using a Luxman CL-32, which was not horrible, but ARC seems to have "the secret code" where pre-amps are concerned.

Cheers, and happy listening!
oldaudiophile
307 posts
 
Rbstehno, I did say I was making a "general" observation. I couldn't be less interested in who or what's right or wrong here but it sounds like you just proved my point. Did you say you replaced a $6,000 "nice" integrated with $12,000+ of separates? And you did this when you upgraded to "larger bigger" speakers? Did I get that right? I'm assuming you know that components need to be properly matched in order to sound their best,  right? If you went from 8 ohm nominal load to 4 ohm nominal load speakers, it would make sense that you'd likely need an amplification source with a better current supply to drive "larger bigger" speakers. Care to elaborate more specifically on your component juggling?
whip
3 posts
 
Bryston Bargain - I recently acquired a Bryston SP-1 for about $450 for the specific purpose of using as a two channel pre-amp. The two channel section is based on the BP-25 witch was their top of their line for decades. This one sounds awesome. Every once in a while one of these comes up for sale pretty cheap. If you need a two channel pre , might want to look for these .  
speakermaster
738 posts
 
You can not get back what is lost further up the chain so therefore the cartridge or the cd player/streamer/dac is the most important followed by the phono preamp/pre amp and then the amplifier but when you find a really good amplifier that will play any speaker that is when the magic really happens.
pauly
1,012 posts
 
I always thought that the amp has a greater impact to sound quality, but my experiment proved otherwise.

Your experiment proves nothing. The more expensive preamp, less expensive amp combination happened to be the better option given the components you used. That will not always be the case.

 You simply cannot make a blanket statement like that based on two pre- power-amp combinations.
More to discover