Is my preamp useless?


I enjoy my current system, which is built around a BAT VK-52SE preamp. I listen mostly to digital, via a Bryston BDP-2 player into a PS Audio DSD. I also enjoy vinyl on my VPI Classic/Dynavector/Sutherland 20-20 combo. Like most of us, I’m usually on the upgrade path. For me, the next component to upgrade would be the BAT preamp from a 52SE to a 53SE. But something occurred to me. I don’t listen loud. The gain on my PSA DSD is set to less than 100 and the BAT preamp is usually set between -20 and -10. So if my volume control is never set in the + range, is my preamp doing ANYTHING other than attenuating the volume and serving as a multi-input switch? Is all that Super Tube, single gain stage, zero feedback, high energy storage circuitry a waste of money?

Don’t get me wrong. I am very pleased with the sounds I hear. But if my pre isn’t doing anything, then I’d be better off to sell it and get a very simple passive attenuator, wouldn’t I? If that’s the case, what brands and models should I listen to?
Thanks for any advice.
slanski62

Showing 3 responses by larryi

The first step would be to just take the BAT out of the system and use the PS Audio volume control to see what that does to the sound. If it improves the sound, you at least know that some improvement is possible by going without the linestage. If the sound does not improve, it might be the case that the PS Audio volume control is at fault (some say attenuation in the digital domain is less desirable than analogue attenuation), in which case you will have to at least try alternatives.

Is the flexibility and remote control features of the BAT important to you? Will a passive have to include some of the features of the BAT? What kind of amps will the passive have to work with? Some additional information would be helpful.
I do wonder if there is some missing context to what has been quoted from Nelson Pass. He is big into supporting the DIY crowd (puts schematics for First Watt designs on line). If he is talking to that crowd, he would be addressing those who tend to be very conscious of the price-performance relationship and would never spend really big bucks to get a tiny increment of improvement. I can see him telling them that MUCH more expensive actives are not worth it even though he builds ultra expensive actives for a different crowd that is not as concerned about price vs. performance.

Mr. Hansen of Ayre has stated that passives will outperform actives in suitable systems until one gets pretty high up in price for the active unit. There might be some truth in that.
As with anything audio, a LOT depends on personal taste and system compatibility, and therefore, comments about which types or models are good or not are just rough generalizations. I "tend" to prefer active tube units over the passives I have heard in my system and that of friends. I also like transformer coupling, which means that the linestage has a transformer at the output and the amp has a transformer at the input.

But, I have heard, and liked transformer-based passives too (Silver Rock). These sound vibrant, lively and deliver the kind of "dense" or saturated sound that I like. I also got to hear the Placette passive linestage (conventional resistor) and the active linestage in my system and preferred the active (I bought the active). My system is not ideal for passives, because of the requirement for a long interconnect between the linestage and amp.

In a friend's system, I heard a linestage built around a light dependent resistor passive. This was an ideal setup for a passive--short interconnects, low output impedance source and high input impedance amp. I liked the sound of the system, but, when we substituted a really nice tube linestage, the dynamics improved markedly. There were three listeners and we all agreed that the tube unit sounded better (including the owner of the custom-built passive unit).

Apart from the sound, some passives present practicality issues that should at least be considered before going that route. Many, particularly of the transformer variety, have too few stepped levels so that it seems like the ideal volume is always somewhere in between steps. To me, the steps should never be greater than 2 db, and 1 db is better. Most do not allow for balance control and most are not remotely controllable (getting the right setting matters a lot to the sound and instantaneous comparison
afforded by remote control is a requirement for that purpose).

There is a form of transformer-based passive that I have only heard briefly that may be of interest. It is one based on an autoformer (kind of transformer). There is a remotely controllable version from Bent Audio that gets around all of the practical limitations of such units--it is remotely controllable, has 1 db steps over a 70 db range and it can control balance. I have not heard it, but, it is based on the autoformer designed by Dave Slagle so it should be pretty good. If you are not technically inclined, you will need someone to custom build a linestage around the module you can purchase. The Bent Audio unit can be found at:

http://www.bentaudio.com/index2.html