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 11 responses by dracule1

Georgelofi, I agree Bascom's comments have to be taken with a grain of salt given he is on PS Audio promoting his design.  However, the same argument can be applied to you since you are a manufacture of LDR passive preamps.  I myself own potentiometer, stepped attenuator, LDR, and autoformer based passives believing passives are better than active preamps under the right circumstances (eg, low output impedance source, high input impedance amp, and short IC length).  But my recent experience with a modest active preamp supports much of his claims.  Time to reevaluate my prejudices against active preamps.
tbg, you're not getting an argument from me, and I've been using passive pre for years. I guess I just didn't meet the right active pre to make me change my mind.
I do believe BK struggled with the passive vs active over the years and came to accept what his ears were telling him rather than what he was taught in engineering class. I don’t think this is the first time he’s telling this story just to sell a product. Seems like a honest man, despite the setting of this interview.
Kernelbob, I too have the Tortuga Audio preamp with variable impedance. It is the best passive I have ever tried. However, my modded active preamp, which I bought used (no longer in production) and had it modded (under $500 total for preamp and mod), is better or just as good in almost every category, except for the bass which I have indicate earlier is too damped. The Tortuga has the best bass of any other passives I’ve tried. Its bass is like that of a very good active preamp, extended and dynamic with just the right amount of natural bloom.
Georgelofi, I know the arguments for using passive preamps (including Nelson’s), as I am a big supporter of the passive route. Having used passives of all types for the past 9 years, I know the benefits. It’s just that this little modded active preamp has turned my views upside down. The only thing I don’t like about this active preamp is the over damped bass which doesn’t sound quite natural. Everything else is as good or better than my LDR preamp and other passives in my arsenal.
System matching with passive pre is critical indeed. It can make or break the sound.  You really don't have to worry about that with an active pre, which I find so convenient and much less of a headache. 
Paul79, I really didn’t think anyone would be interested because it’s no longer made and is considered mid fi to most. It’s the Acurus RL11 that was modified. Acurus was considered the little cousin to Aragon. The stock preamp is nothing to write home about, but once it’s modified to be direct coupled and run in Class A with better output mosFETs and power supply upgrade, etc, it beat every passive I have in almost all categories of music reproduction important to me.
Georgelofi,

"Except for some tube output sources which have ridiculous high output impedance (more than >1kohm). Or some ClassD amp that are very low input impedance (less than <10kohms). These users usually find something wrong with the sound of passives, and say active preamps are better, oblivious to the fact that they had an impedance mismatch with the passive they used."

Yes, I completely agree.  Most of my sources have output impedance less than 100 ohm and my amps have input impedances 50k to 100kohm. Although my tube DAC has output impedance ~1.6kohm, it still sounds great in my setup using passive pre.

George, sometimes it's just too much of a hassle to match your system to a passive preamp, although you can get some great results when all the stars align. Sometimes an active can be as or more rewarding without the hassle.  As it stands now, I like both in my system, but the active pre just does more for me overall.
Genes,

"Create your own "neutrality" of sound. One that produces a believable sound that YOU THOROUGHLY ENJOY. Not one we are to be told is enjoyable but does not quite move you. It always has to be quality - low noise - design. That never varies.
C'est la vie."

Sage advice. You're a true philosopher. But there are many in high end who will try to convince you what the "truth" should be and what should be "enjoyable". And they will charge an arm and a leg for it.
Audioman58, would you care share who made your preamp? You can PM me if you like.