I used to think passive preamps were superior to active preamps given right the setup, but


my recent evaluation of a modded old SS preamp has me a little befuddled.  I've evaluated $10K+ active preamps in the past and was never impressed especially given their cost.  In general, I've found passives to do better job. I know there's ongoing debate on this.  But here's a very illuminating video on the subject by Bascom King, one of the legends of high end audio.

https://youtu.be/HHl8F9amyY4
dracule1

Showing 1 response by auxinput

On the argument that passive is better/worse than an active preamp, just keep in mind that the preamp is just another piece in the audio signal line that his helping shape the sound.  Even a DC blocking signal capacitor in a passive preamp can shape the sound somewhat when the capacitor charges/discharges the audio waveform as it passes through.

As far people who like their passive preamps, it really depends on the sonics coming from your source.  So many DACS/sources can still have that digital type square waveform sound that lacks bass and can be thin.  In this case, a great tube or Class A preamp can really help things.  If the source is tube based or has multiple Class A circuits that are filtering/shaping the sound from the DAC chip, a passive preamp may sound better than an active (depending on equipment choice / synergy).  I describe some of this effect in this post here:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/292574-do-i-really-need-high-slew-rate-opamp-output-my...

A tube or Class A preamp can help further shape this waveform.  It can actually translate more bass from the original DAC waveform and may even give you more midrange body and overall better volume.  Things may sound louder.  On the other hand, a very "solid-state" non Class A preamp may just attempt to reproduce the sound waveforms exactly as they entered the preamp with little or no shaping.