Dumb question......why do you need a preamp?

You'd think after 50 years I would know this, but I don't. Aren't today's integrated enough?

OP ... yes!

Some integrated today are more than enough ,if that what you need. Many yrs ago Dan Modwright modified my Sony sacd player 9000 es with a very good volume control . I used it direct to amp.I like the sound better. Before I heard a Backert preamp ? I never care for preamp, Now I have 5 preamp 4 tubes , one solid state Krell Krc3.

My MSB Discrete DAC has a volume control and plenty of output. Almost 4v at 300 Ohms and close to 2v at 150 Ohms. I use predicted 150 Ohm 2v setting and without a preamp. I owned a Benchmark HP4 preamp and I found that the sound was better without it. So I sold it. The MSB has a high quality volume control and I only have a digital source. 

For me the pre amp is the hub of all the components.

Streamer & cd player to DAC. DAC to preamp, tt to preamp, one pre out to sub, 2nd pre out to main amp.

I use a old recapped Carver c4000. Attenuators for high & low HZ, balance, filters, an awesume sonic holograghy feature which enhances soundstage.

Even has a built in amp for time delay speakers. I dont use it anymore but it gave a nice concert hall effect or " opened up" a small room.

Added gain, drive, dynamics, energy and sound stage. 

I have a luxman L-507z integrated amp. I havent seen anyone put a tube pre-amp on it yet. Altho with cornwalls it might be interesting. 

@paqua123 - The Luxman integrateds really are something special.  Many manufacturers claim that their integrateds have their top of the line preamp circuits built in and who knows but in the case of the Luxmans I honestly believe it.   The difficult thing for me is that I'd actually like to go fully active, and trade from the Luxman integrated to Luxman pre, but the pre's are like 2x as expensive as the integrateds.

Having enough output voltage from a source component to drive the amplifier(s) is a good start, but may not be enough for some listeners depending on their equipment, set-up configuration, and listening preferences. Listeners who use passive volume controls, either inside or outside of the DAC, typically value the clarity and absence of noise they perceive from removing the active stage from their signal path. However, even with source components having enough voltage to drive the amplifiers, impedance differences between source and amplifier, and cable length, can affect the sound. Improved dynamics, body, and tonal qualities are what I read about most from folks who switch from using passive volume controls to an active stage, or a transformer/autoformer based solution.

Of course, active circuitry and transformers add their own sonic changes (and potentially noise) to the signal so, the trade-offs are sometimes described as improved clarity and lower noise when using a passive solution vs. improved body and energy when using active circuitry.  Choices include either:

• Live with the impedance relationship between the source component (usually a DAC) and the amplifier(s) and minimize the effects of impedance by keeping IC cables short and selecting equipment with low output impedance and high input impedance, or
• Utilize an active stage (or transformers/autoformers) between the source and amplifier(s) in order to improve the output/input impedance relationship.

In cases where the source output voltage is sufficient, the active stage can be as simple as a unity-gain buffer (you would not need more gain), or transformers/autoformers, which can be set up for unity or other levels of gain up to about 6dB. Examples include totaldac’s d1-driver-sublime, which I believe is basically a low (or unity) gain active stage, or Empirical Audio’s Final Drive, which are a pair of passive transformer buffers/selectors. In both examples, the manufacturer’s goal was to insert a device in-line that optimizes impedance matching in order to improve the sound of their DAC when directly driving amplifier(s).

Simple answer, it sounds better. I have a Ayre KX-5 Twenty, it wasn’t cheap. I tried the bypass from my CD player straight to the DAC as I have a volume control on the CD player. It sounded lifeless. There’s a reason the preamp is one of the most expensive components in a system and one of the most important. I can’t get over how much I’d been missing before I got the Ayre preamp.

I’m a true believer if you want a top sounding system, get the best preamp you can afford.

I run a 'vintage' audio system (so, equipment from the 1960s / 1970s; and things like a Reel to Reel tape deck, etc.) and I recently switched from a fully integrated solid state receiver (which is basically a tuner / preamp / amplifier all in one unit) to a tube preamp / dual solid state monoblock amplifiers.

In all fairness, the receiver I had was a very good high output unit for it's time (160 wpc) and the sound quality was also very good... I have noticed, however, what I feel is an improvement in overall SQ with the separates setup; and more specifically, adding tubes in at the preamp stage adds a certain quality and fullness to the sound that I did not even know was 'lacking' in my previous configuration.

I thought perhaps it was simply confirmation bias on my part; but I have gotten similar comments from my family members that they too hear a pleasant difference since my 'upgrade'...

With an integrated amplifier you do not need to use a preamp, but there may be reasons you might want to. If your integrated amplifier does not have a built in Phono section is one reason off the top of my mind to add a preamp.

All the best.

Two reasons to “need” a pre-amp

1) to deliver a particular sound that you like 

2) features that may be useful. A volume control would be most common.  
 

If you already have these then you do not need a preamp.  

Preamps do impedance matching which is very important. I've played the game hooking up DAC's directly to my Power amplifiers but in the end my active preamp always sounded better!

@erik_squires

A good example of having separates is an electrostatic speaker

Can you explain what this means, please?

The first step in amplification where you take a very small signal from a dac, cd player, or turntable into a big enough signal, line stage, to be recognized by the amplifier is a very delicate and specialized task that is often neglected. This task is done by the preamp. It can be incorporated into an integrated amp or a dac without the proper attention or resources it deserves. As someone who posted here, if you try a proper preamp, you will have your answer. Once that first step is done, how good or how bad, there is not much even the best amplifier in the world can do. So, in theory, preamplification to line stage is more important than amplification if you believe in the proverbial garbage in, garbage out.

Wow! Nominated for best 1st post...in recent memory?

Well done and thank you sir.

For dacs, unless R2R has analog output no volume control, chip dacs or those with digital volume control bit stripping is the issue.

All integrateds are a compromise. That doesn’t mean they don’t sound good, there are quite a few that do sound good. I’ve owned many integrateds since the late 70’s, and have owned more separates during this same time.

Why I say this, quite a few of my preamps had separate chassis’s for the power supply, what integrated do you know of that has a separate power supply for the internal preamp section. Since external power supply’s are a good thing for a standalone preamp, an integrated shares the power supply between the preamp/amp/dac/phono preamp sections. 
 

I got rid of my latest standalone preamp when I got rid of my tt and Otari r2r and now only do digital. My dac controls the volume going directly to the amp. The designer of the dac has stated that the dac sounds better when you can get the volume up into the 80’s setting or higher. This is easy to do with the attenuation feature built into the dac. And yes, I auditioned/tested my digital sound quality going thru a high priced preamp or going directly to the amp.

You only need a preamp if you wish to add "color" to your sound.  Otherwise, if you do not have these: a volume control and/or selectable input device will be enough.

All gear has compromises including separates. I think making an assumption that separates always sound better is flawed today. When comparing separates to integrated amps today the sound quality differences will come down to design and execution, not the number of rectangular boxes. Huge power supplies with multiple chokes, big iron and coke can sized caps all in a separate chassis is no longer the only way to build a robust power supply for a preamp. Plenty of wonderful sounding tube preamps with low part counts and brilliantly designed circuits. Circuits with very short signal paths and low noise. Backert Labs comes to mind as one example.

So one can certainly find high quality preamp sections in an integrated amp. They can be found presently and one just needs to do due diligence when shopping. Also, there are some real sonic benefits to eliminating long ICs and connectors with a well designed Int amp. These shorter signal paths do have potential sonic benefits that offset some of the advantages that separates offer. Many integrated amps out there utilizing SOTA attenuation beyond an Alps pot 🙂.

Well thought out design including internal shielding and chassis vibration control can also help mitigate the advantages of separates. Simplicity does bring the opportunity for sonic gains.

Over the years I have heard integrated amps that are sonically superior to separates costing much more. I have also heard separates outperforming more  costly integrated amps. It comes down to the design implementation of the pieces in question, not simply the chassis count. Also, we listen to complete systems and the synergistic impact of the Int amp or separates also plays a role. It seems to me there are many considerations.

I have an MSB Discrete DAC with a Premier Power Base.  it has a built-in volume control, so a preamp is unnecessary.  However, at the urging of my local stereo dealer, he lent me an ARC LS28SE to try.  I felt that it really added so little benefit that I returned it.  However, when I moved up to an ARC REF 6, there was a marked improvement across the board. So does one "need" a preamp?  I didn't, but putting the REF 6 in the system really bettered the volume control in the DAC.  I think that it is a testament to the quality of MSB's volume control that one needs a 16K preamp to better it, but better it it does!

You only need a preamp if you wish to add "color" to your sound. Otherwise, if you do not have these: a volume control and/or selectable input device will be enough.

@patl In my experience I’ve had less coloration (and more impact) when an active line stage is used. Passive controls are very susceptible to interconnect cable colorations; a good line state can eliminate that. The best place for a passive control, so as to prevent this problem, is inside the amplifier.

I am not an engineer and speak from personal experience as well as from consulting several audio engineer friends.
You need a preamp in most cases, primarily because it provides extra drive from the source to the power amps. Even if you have enough gain, the preamp does impedance matching so it creates synergy between the source and the power amps.   The volume control is also critical and in most cases, using a DAC with digital volume creates loss because of losing bits at lower volumes. The preamp is also useful for switching between sources if you have multiple. I had my share of experiments with different passive preamps and was always disappointed, because of hearing different anomalies (lack of dynamics, body, extreme brightness or unbalanced sound etc) so always returned to the active preamp, which, despite its flaws, better than going passive.

Zoltan

I've used high end DACs with built in volume controls and always found better performance using a dedicated preamp.

 I agree  with others here.... the question is not specific.

I've been dabbling with stereo equipment for almost 50 years and the majority of the time I've had separates. The versatility of a preamp is key for me ....like when I had my McIntosh C26 ...the stereo reverse or R&L to left or what ever gives me Jimmy Pages' guitar reversed on or off to only on or both speakers. Now I have a C46 that gives me a fine tuning feature with a built in equalizer and balanced connections for clarity. Another reason is that you can try different power amps for more versatility. Couldn't live without the preamp in my world.

an integrated is a preamp + a power amp

No matter what you do you're going to need the functionality of a preamp. Which means that the sound of your system will be affected by the preamp in an integrated, in a DAC with preamp, streamer, or whatever you use. I have used my headphone amp as a preamp because it has two RCA outputs. It sounded terrible.

I think a preamp has the greatest affect on a system's sound. I have demoed a passive preamp, which does not use power. It simply chooses which input to feed to the amp and has a volume control. Theoretically, it is the proverbial straightwire that does not affect the sound. I didn't like it. The sound of my system became flat and the soundstage collapsed. When I went back to my ARC preamp, the soundstage inflated and instruments had bloom again. One might say that I preferred sound distortion. So be it. I much preferred my ARC to the passive preamp.

My point is that the preamp is an important part of your audio system, and you're going to have a preamp no matter what you do. I always think you should use your ears to evaluate a system component. Compare an integrated to separates in the same price range. See which one you like best. In other words, just because the preamp is built into an integrated doesn't mean you no longer have to think about how it affects the sound of your system.

My dac has a volume control but I prefer the sound of my system with my tube preamp in the mix. I don’t think it’s better I just prefer the sound of a tube preamp with a ss amp. I always have. Plus, I have multiple sources and I use the HT bypass feature so that my HT processor can use the same speakers and amp. Would I buy a preamp if I didn’t want tubes and had no need for input switching? Probably not 

I don’t have a preamp and my sound quality is better for it.

@goofyfoot curious your past preamps? 

Simple answer is no you don’t need a preamp to play music through an amplifier.  You just need volume control on the amplifier or source and you’re good to go.  Preamp is exactly what its namesake implies.  It’s just a signal processor between your source and amplifier.  If you have a decent steamer, you should be able to hook straight to your amp.  

I don't understand the question at all if this member is saying he has an integrated amp, because then he is using a preamp. This sounds like an AI question.

Whether to use a pre or not is a hotly debated issue. I think this is a result of improper impedance matching between pre and power amps and the quality of the DAC analog stage. I use a MSB Reference DAC which has an additional analog input which I use with my Phono pre. I had a VAC sig preamp originally but sold it when I compared the SQ to the Reference alone. As others have said Dealers push Preamps to increase sales.

For high fidelity purposes,

Line stage, dac’s output stage, phono stage should all be in one box on its own with very short internal signal paths and no cables. Power amp should be in a separate box on its own, i.e., if executed well, 2 boxes should be all you need.

Keeping a separate preamp box and running wires to it from a dac or phono box doesn’t always give the best results. Wire made of dragon scales and fairy dust is still not good. An "integrated" amp, i.e. line stage and power amp in the same box doesn’t always give the best results.

An integrated can be enough. It depends on what you want and your budget. Generally speaking you’ll get more out of separates. 

RE: active vs. passive - I’d like counter that a passive “preamp” can be better. It sure has been a revelation in my system. (Although, I’m curious about trying a different active at some point.)

Food for thought.

Ref.: https://www.stereophile.com/content/brilliant-corners-13-emia-remote-autoformer-and-listening-master-jazzman-jerome-sabbagh

An integrated can be good if you want to have a pile of gear between your speakers or run long speaker cables.

@skinzy

Any dac needs to emit its analogue signalat preamp output levels. Your experience matches my own. Obviously if you use a digital attenuator at minimum output levels you are throwing too many bits away. Using a high quality analogue attenuator built into a high quality dac‘s analogue stage -excluding very rare instances of major impedance mismatches- IS EQUIVALENT TO USING A PRE! while saving a set of cable transmissions with their associated losses and distortions, i.e. superior

I have had equipment combinations that prevented getting full power out of the amplifier because the input signal was too low. The primary advantage of an active preamp other than source selection and equalization is assuring there is enough level to get full power from the amplifier. So while not necessary in every case, in some cases it is.

For my computer system its a minimalist DAC/preamp and Class D 500 WPC amp driving my Ohm Walsh 2000s with a subwoofer output driving SVS PC2000 subs. It does all I need it to do and very well indeed. The levels are matched well enough I have no shortage of loudness available and its decent quality sound too. Good enough for who its for. :)