I have a cd player with 2 volts of output, but the only spec I can find on Impedance reads " load impedance over 10 kilohms". Not sure if this is suggesting the output impedance is 10,000 ohms! Does not seem possible!?
The unit is a Sony dvp ns900v sacd player. I purchased the LS for a second system and to just play with. |
Thanks. Yes 10k is very high. As you saw the manual uses the term " load impedance". Oh well, seems my cd player is a potentially poor match.
I will try it. Yes, mine is the TRL mod with battery power supply and all. Paul did remove all video outputs as an FYI. |
Does the LS improve with the battery option? Curious what you folks have found? Not sure why it would, but thought I would ask. |
Devilboy, it is great when you find something like the LS in your system that really works perfectly and exceeds all your expectations. Very excited for you!
I tried the LS in another system and it simply did not work. But reading everything here I was tempted to try it again with my new amp and speakers. I am always open minded and just had to give the LS another try.
I purchased one a few weeks ago and inserted it into my system. My new amp has an input impedance of 475k ohms and I actually measured it at 570k ohms! My new speakers are also relatively efficient so I felt I could give the LS a real chance to sing!
Well, I put the little LS on top of my 70 pound reference preamp and gave it a second whirl. I took notice immediately as my music sounded wonderful .
Dead quite background with nice tone and no hint of grain or any type of nasties. Nicely detailed and certainly earned my respect. For $500 and in the right system, the LS is a bargain of large proportion.
After several weeks of longer term listening I have come to respect this little passive. I would go as far as saying it kept pace and even bested some big dollar active preamps I have heard. Actives that sell for several thousand new. However, in the end I sold it as my tube preamp just surpassed it in too many ways. While my preamp costs $4000 new, compared to the wonderful LS it is not overpriced considering the improvement it brings to my music collection.
So I would not say all high end gear is overpriced as good values do reside in other places. I do agree that we must be careful as it is indeed easy to overpay in this hobby. |
I am using an Aesthetix Atlas Hybrid amp with a 6sn7 input stage. |
Well, I am taken back. The Atlas amp I own is high gain(26 db) if memory serves. It is also a zero feedback design. It has a measured input impedance of 570k ohms. It has a rated input sensitivity of: 60mV for 1W output, 2.3V for full power.
If this amp is a poor match, then the LS is not suitable for most all amps ever made and not a real world product - period. Several vocal and seasoned Aphiles own the Atmasphere/LS combo,and the Atma amps have a rated sensitivilty of 3.1v to full power. They say the Atma amps are good matches and this whole input sensitivity thing is overblown. I happen to think your product is real world, and the Atlas amp was a wonderful match. Please understand the consequence of your statement is a clear message that only in the rarest of circumstances will any stereo owner ever hear the true possibilities of this unit. I must say this seems near impossible George.
No, my amp and set-up were most accommodating to the LS. If not, good luck to you owners who think you have begun to hear your LS system's possibilities. You have not. It is even better then you imagine. LOL |
Well the thing is this Paul. The LS sounded glorious in my system. Really downright glorious. The Atlas is a tube amp at heart in the way it sounds. It is a beautiful sounding amp. Quite special.
The LS sounded amazing and let the Atlas and my speakers shine. No doubt, in my small mind, that my system was a supurb match for the LS. I guess I simply cannot say my active was better. When I say that it seems something must not have been perfect for the LS. Oh well. I will let that frustration go and know George truly believes, with passion, that the LS is the gold standard. Good to have that passion!
As awesome as the LS is in my well suited system, the tube active I own was just awesomerrrrrrr.... |
Devilboy, it is great when you find something like the LS in your system that really works perfectly and exceeds all your expectations. Very excited for you!
I tried the LS in another system and it simply did not work. But reading everything here I was tempted to try it again with my new amp and speakers. I am always open minded and just had to give the LS another try.
I purchased one a few weeks ago and inserted it into my system. My new amp has an input impedance of 475k ohms and I actually measured it at 570k ohms! My new speakers are also relatively efficient so I felt I could give the LS a real chance to sing!
Well, I put the little LS on top of my 70 pound reference preamp and gave it a second whirl. I took notice immediately as my music sounded wonderful .
Dead quite background with nice tone and no hint of grain or any type of nasties. Nicely detailed and certainly earned my respect. For $500 and in the right system, the LS is a bargain of large proportion.
After several weeks of longer term listening I have come to respect this little passive. I would go as far as saying it kept pace and even bested some big dollar active preamps I have heard. Actives that sell for several thousand new. However, in the end I sold it as my tube preamp just surpassed it in too many ways. While my preamp costs $4000 new, compared to the wonderful LS it is not overpriced considering the improvement it brings to my music collection.
So I would not say all high end gear is overpriced as good values do reside in other places. I do agree that we must be careful as it is indeed easy to overpay in this hobby. |
Yes, this is really to bad and a seriously poor decision. The sense of community here is disappearing because of recent changes and with it goes the long term health of this site. We are seeing the fall and ultimate ruin of something that was a joy to many. |
George you need to go his email,
Parttimeaudiophile@comcast.net |
He has a Facebook page also if you are on Facebook? |
George, are you saying that a DIY guy like me really cannot place an LDR volume control in a tube preamp. It would be interesting to compare to a nice Shallco stepped attenuator.
Would LDR actually sound better then a Shallco in a top notch active tube preamp. Interesting idea. You seem to think the heat in a tube pre may cause problem? |
Last question. What temp fluctuations are you assuming in these cases? How hot? Over 90 degrees F? Thanks... |
When I take temps in my preamp (tube) I have never read temps any higher than 90 - 102 degrees F. If the room temp is 75 degrees, then I assume no issue?
For cost and hassle reasons the thought of an LDR is very interesting. Shallco attenuators are very expensive and a lot of work. They sound fantastic and I must admit doubt that a low cost LDR would sound as good.
But, I have never directly compared in an active preamp and am open to trying. If it sounded as good, then it would be a nice alternative for sure.
Not sure if anyone has done this type of comparison in an active preamp. Hard to do without having two of the same preamp for comparison. I suppose one could solder in and out the two attenuators, but going back and forth would be a HUGE hassle. |
Thanks Clio09. I will check with him and his results. |
Clio09,
As an FYI. I now own a Music Reference RM9 MKII that I modified with Duelund CAST caps. Based on comments from you and others I thought I would try it. I love this amp! Very musical and engaging. |
Dgarretson, your the Man! I just looked at your system with all the mods. Very nice job indeed. I have started the whole DIY thing and am learning.
I would love to visit with you on how to try the LDR mod as well as how you made your speaker cables. I have heavily modified my speakers to great effect and completed a tube amp project by gutting a tube amp and building it back up with better parts and improved power supply. I had direction from a tube amp expert but did learn a lot. I was very excited to view your system and work. |
|
Ha! Love your comments George. As you know I have tried your passive three times, but just prefer my tube active. But, I do like the way your passive sounds and it is a killer value. Just not as real sounding as my active.
I soooo wanted to like your passive as much to save money and simplify.
I tried three times as I really hoped everything I see here would be true for me. I have no bias to spend more money or take up more space:)
Glad to see so many happy LS owners and the thread staying so vibrant. This is a good thing for all us Aphiles. |
Nelson Pass has made and is making some pretty expensive actives.Very expensive. Apparenty he thinks they sound very real. If not, one would say he is not being true to himself and we customers. He sells these expensive actives touting neutrality, fidelity etc...
I don't want to hear what the source sounds like because it is also flawed. A total system is all one can judge George.
Always look forward to your audio religion. |
You know I said all sources are flawed and they are for sure. Nothing in audio is perfect unfortunately. |
Wow, you have the perfect source! Please let me know what it is. Also, please let me know the perfect speaker, amp, and well you already have the perfect preamp.
No kidding. I really want to know what you consider perfect beyond your passive. |
What is your source? Analog or digital? I agree that the source is most important George. I currently have an Aesthetix Romulus Signature dac/CD player. I very much like it. |
Looks like a very nice and well thought out system. I do not follow some of your acronyms so more detail would help. I have owned the two CD players you mention and love ESL speakers.
I bet your system is very enjoyable and because you built/modified it to your liking even more satisfying.
I have modified my system to deliver exactly what I want over time and also like to work on gear.
Enjoy. |
George as I have shared with you in the past I respect you and your passion. While I do think you can be tad narrow in your view of other ways to attain fidelity, I nevertheless enjoy your helping spirit and enthusiasm.
I would love Mr. Pass to share with us if he thinks his expensive and wonderful active line stages sound better to him compared to a passive like the LSA. Would he say your passive is as good or better sounding? Forget features, as I am just talking about sound quality and how live and real it sounds. I think he would say his best actives sound more like the real thing if asked this direct question. Love to hear his comment on this one comparison question.
I know there is technically no need for an active as passives like yours can sound good indeed. Seems the very best attempts at SOTA music within a stereo system often times involve great actives...not always.
What about the recording engineers of the world? Should they be eliminating gain stages? Fact is eliminating these gain stages does impact dynamics. High frequencies compress all together so you can hear everything at the same level. The background noise is just as loud as the voice etc...This is just an example of properly executed gain stages and their importance.
My experience is not one proving my tube active colors the sound to my taste. You have said this often, but that is simply not the case George. For me, and based on my experience with with TRL Dude compared to the LSA, color had little to do with it.
The dynamic impact of whole performance and individual part becomes more live and real sounding with the Dude. The relative volume, layering, placement, impact, of each instrument to the other on the stage are captured with greater fidelity with the Dude. These are not subjective color preferences, rather they are the nuances that make a stereo system sound like real, live music.
I don't point this out to somehow prove my active is better than the LSA for all, but in an effort to have a broader discourse on the different roads to fidelity to the music. No absolutes and an open mind on other possibilities. |
Your Dude comment is strange and out of place. Sorry to see it and sorry you just will not have a nice and reasonable conversation and back and forth.
My feelings and passion for audio go far beyond the box you placed me in. This is also true of others you commented on. Read all I review and post about. Most disappointing George. |
Accept your apology George. All is good and we can move on enjoying this site. |
Life has thrown me a curve ball that necessitated the selling off of my most expensive gear to pay for some specialized back surgery. The surgery was very, very expensive and cutting edge . It was not covered in large part by insurance. However, I still wanted a great sounding system. I just returned from surgery yesterday after a long week in LA where the surgery took place. Just two days after this special surgery I am doing very well and feel I spent my money wisely.
The LSA placed directly in my dac was the perfect answer. I am happy with the net result of my system and feel I spent my money wisely again.
I placed the LSA guts into a Yamamoto dac which feeds an Ultra Fi Monaco 845 DHT amp. The resulting music is resolute, musical, and very engaging. I could not be more pleased. Are there trade-offs in going from my active tube preamp/Aesthetix Romulus combo to the one box Yamamoto dac with internal LSA Attenuator? Well in audio there are always trade-offs. Without getting into all the Aphile differences I can certainly say that I am enjoying my music as much as ever. That is the bottom line. |
Thanks Al and Swampwalker! |
I purchased the following power supply based on George's suggestion in this thread,
TeraDak TeraLink X1/X2 DC8.5V 1A + USB DC5V port Linear Power Supply
Well I think this little power supply is a must buy for the LS. I could not be more pleased with the results. I have the linear wall wart as well as a cheap battery supply and this TeraDak is far better in my rig.
Enjoying the music and just wanted to pass this on. |
Well for me the differences were easy to pick up in my particular set up. Remember, my LSA components were placed inside my dac thus turning my dac into a dac with volume control. This eliminated the need for a set of ICs and RCA connectors. I also used some very good silver/gold solid core wire in cotton from Jupiter Condenser to wire the LSA board inside my dac.
I prefer the battery over the wall wart in my system finding it sounded more relaxed and engaging. Just wanted to listen more with the battery. The difference here was slight and some may like the linear wall wart better because it did seem a tad, just tad, more dynamic and upfront.
However the TeraDak supply simply put a big smile on my face immediately. It delivers the best of both the battery and linear wall wart and then some! I immediately heard more powerful and impactful bass. This was evident the moment the first song began playing. In addition, the music in general was more dynamic and alive. One final area of improvement that I found most noticeable was a blacker background with the instruments emerging with more realism, resolution, and sense of space and real estate between instruments. This was quite surprising to me and very fun to listen to. I really did not expect this result.
I use two amplifiers and both revealed the same improvement. An 845 DHT tube SET amp and a Lector VM200 hybrid amp that is direct coupled. Both work great with my set up and the LSA . |
That's it. Comes with everything you need! |
I should point out my Teradak was set to 8.5vdc, but it is simple to open up the unit and adjust to 9vdc etc.....using the blue color potentiometer.
I also found improvement plugging the Teradak into my line conditioner. Lastly, I built my own cable from the LSA to the TeraDak using Western Electric 16 gauge NOS wire. That also made a nice little improvement.
Loving it! |
|
Array1138
I purchased the Aum passive also. The last unit the builder made before getting out. I love the sound as it sounds very much like the Lightspeed, but has remote volume, balance, and other options. It also has two outputs.
I loved the Lightspeed in my current system, but really wanted remote. The unit is much more expensive than the Lightspeed so I really paid for features not sound quality improvement. |
"That to me is an indication of the LSA's transparency and faithfulness to the source, and a lack of transparency in The Dude. By transparency I am referring to lack or presence of coloration"
Let me further explain as I think my statement needs more context. I feel it is a matter of taste and not accuracy at all. The LSA plays the instruments more up front and forward - and I mean all of them! The instruments play on the same plane at the front of the speaker. Some may like this. However, to others it is a lack of 3D perspective or depth.
The Dude plays music with greater depth and not all the instruments play on the same forward plane. Some are more set back and not as "up front" on the performance stage. The performance has more perspective and depth. If the recording offers only a forward perspective for all the players, then the Dude reveals that. If the recording is more layered, then the Dude gives that deeper layered presentation.
I found the LSA made my favorite recordings all share that same forwardness for all the instruments. In other words, every recording began to take on the same personality with all the music coming from a plane at the front of the speaker. The whole of the music seemed to be traded off or lost as the vocals and instruments all competed for attention at the front of the stage.
When I attend a symphony or other great sounding live music events I hear instruments positioned differently on the stage with many of them at differing volume and intensity levels. The Dude seems to reflect that reality more. This is exactly what I mean in my statements above. To my ears, in my system, the Dude is every bit as transparent as the LSA, but the Dude seems to possess more fidelity to the space and dimension of the musical experience.
Rather than compare the two which only I can really do based on actual experience, I do find one topic very interesting. Some feel that an active preamp is adding warmth or coloration to obtain a richer sound that is somehow not really in the recording or live musical event. The conclusion given by those is that this richer sound experience is not as accurate or true to the recorded source. This can certainly be true of some active tube units, but not all.
In my experience live music delivers the whole of the instrument. Listen to a grand piano, cello, violin etc… or entire symphony in a great sounding venue and you will hear the rumble, resonance and totality of that instrument. You will hear the orchestra swell in full and rich momentum with a solid deep foundation underlying the whole musical event. Is that added? Is that coloration? I don’t think so. That is what I hear with the Dude. This is what I find missing with the LSA in comparison to the Dude. For me this is critical to reproduce in my home music system. Again, for me alone this is important and it may not be to others. Is a passive missing this part of the music? Is it missing what was intended to be there? Is it actually playing what is recorded and the recording does not sound like the live event? I suppose the last point is possible, but my desire is to hear instruments as they actually sound in a natural setting.
I am not sure a passive is by some mathematical or physical fact the best way to achieve live sound in our homes. Let’s face it; all gear and wire in our systems are reproducing or passing along electrical signals no matter the set-up; Active or passive, tube or SS, horn or ESL, simple or complex and on and on it goes. I don’t think that a passive or active unit is ALWAYS the definitive best means to hearing the wholeness of a musical event – not missing depth, bass foundation, warmth, dynamics, crashing of a cymbal etc…. I cannot accept a sweeping statement that passive units are the best means to live music recreated in our homes. They may be in a particular system to one person’s ears, but that’s about as far as we can take it.
Ok, have it Agoners! |
Transparency means something far different to me. To me it has nothing to do with how the inclusion of a new piece of gear "changes" the resulting sound. That fact needs another word - not transparency IMHO. Transparency refers to how see through or clear the performance sounds without smear, distortion, obstruction of detail by noise etc. Two preamps introduced into a system may result in two different sounding systems both of which can be very transparent.
The Bolero test is simply ANOTHER SYSTEM and not a test for transparency my friends. Tvad's definition and explanation of transparency is completely true and understandable based on how he uses the word.
The preampless system is a STEREO SYSTEM with the purpose of reproducing music that sounds like, well, the "real thing". The real thing is the actual sound of the voice or instrument live or on a very well recorded vehicle.
To the extent a system does this, it is transparent and a clear view into the performance. A system without a preamp is still a system made up of several parts all working together to kick out the resulting sound. By simply removing a preamp one does not necessarily, in effect, get closer to the recording or to the sound of live music.
The two piece system of a source and amp is not necessarily more true to the source or live event. In fact, based on my experience it is missing a piece in the sound reproduction chain of a stereo system that seems to be the heart of a live sounding & natural sound system. What I have termed the "heart" of the system - an active preamp. This has been my experience thus far. I do think it is possible to get the "real thing" with an LSA or no preamp, but that is absolutely system dependent.
A CD player pushing signals out to an LSA or directly to an amp is a system that has a sound and personality that may or may not be transparent or reflective of live music.
Another example - A crossover is part of the sound reproduction system. By removing it one does not automatically get sound that is more transparent or live sounding. Some argue it is, but just like the active preamp question it is still a matter to judge at the end of the system chain - a set of ears in a listening chair. The piano either faithfully reproduces the full sound of that piano (transparent - clear window) or not.
Ok, that is my take on this and why the Bolero test is interesting, but really not much beyond that. |
Pubul57 - Seems I have written pages :-) on this yet no understanding of my point? It may be impossible and that's OK!
A "direct connection" as you say, is as I say, just another STEREO SYSTEM and produces a sound of its own. Direct connection from CD player to amp is not, as another has stated here, the GOLD STANDARD, it is simply another way to hear music out of a stereo system. A CD player driving amps is still a stereo system that does or does not reproduce the voice or instrument accurately to the recording or live event. The END result (sound) of a system is the proof. I and others suggest a passive unit "can" or "sometimes" can, depending on the total system, fail to pass along the recording with a sound that is true to the source. This can also be true of an active unit.
Many folks far more educated then me on audio circuits and recording practices will wax poetically why DAC's/CD players etc.. are an insufficient means to pass along the signal to an amp with only a passive in the chain. Meaning the resulting sound may lack in areas as the system simply lacks the horsepower needed to convey the energy and space of live music and great recordings. I don't want to argue that and all the math and audio geek talk that goes with it. I do know what I hear however in my system. It is not added coloration; it is in fact hearing MORE of the recording as intended with my active in place.
One reason may be as simple as my active Dude preamp has all the lows, all the highs, all the transparency, and depth of field and soundstage width simply because it actually amplifies ALL that is there and does not mask as has been implied. Amplifying the low-level stuff, stuff that might not get through (stage depth & other nuances) is important and not insignificant as we know. Is it possible a great active can get more of this information by way of design then a passive? At least as much? Seems reasonable to me.
Just trying for us to see with a broader view that sweeping comments about one type of design being the GOLD STANDARD may be a little narrow?
Next please….
|
I have one comment or concern that I see in this otherwise great thread. It seems when one person has a different experience or opinion on this preamp their comments are dismissed and marginalized very quickly by some.
The reason must be system match or how the amp was made etc…but rarely is it simply accepted that another actually preferred the other preamp in a side by side test.
I can tell you the Samson amps by TRL do have the input impedance spec mentioned already. I can tell you I tried the Lightspeed with Atmasphere Ma1’s that have an input impedance of 100K ohms. My comments match those of Knghifi very closely. Our fine tube units simply performed better to our ears with no other reason than our own ears and likes.
This is OK right? The Lightspeed is also a good preamp, but won’t win every a/b shootout right?
Your thoughts? |
Fair enough Clio09. I agree with your thoughts and let’s move on. I and Knghifi were not attacked and I did overstate that a bit. Ya, I did purchase the preamps in the threads you posted. Liked them both. I will always tell the Agon community of gear I find to be awesome as time goes by.
Please understand that one can reasonably take the comments of the Lightspeed builder as implying, if not directly stating, a match/impedance issue was present This is especially true when the owner gave the spec asked for and it was still questioned?
That is the way I read it, but the Lightspeed builder may well be confused on the amp in question and really having trouble understanding how it has the spec confirmed by Knghifi. This is certainly possible. |
Ok, please don’t yell at me Fiddler. Please read George’s post below. Seems pretty clear he is saying it is the most accurate means to hearing recorded music. He implies this on his LSA vs all other attempts at a preamp. He has said this same thing in several other posts here. I have no problem with him thinking this or saying it, I just don’t agree and want to voice my opinion.
“the Lightspeed Attenuator (LSA) as you guys have nick named it, is the closest you will get to playing music that's truest to the source (cdp, phono ect), and the truest way to hear the way the recording engineers wanted you to hear how they have recorded the music.
12-31-10: Georgelofi
You are right guys the Lightspeed Attenuator (LSA) as you guys have nick named it, is the closest you will get to playing music that's truest to the source (cdp, phono ect), and the truest way to hear the way the recording engineers wanted you to hear how they have recorded the music.
As it adds nothing and subtracts nothing, like I say it is like you have plugged the (cdp or phono ect) directly into the poweramps input, no preamps at all in the signal path, yet still maintain control over the level (volume).
I accept that for some listeners it's preferable to have the added ambience, echo (if you have microphonic tubes). Also the tonal changes, because all active components have their own signature, even different brand potentiometers (Alps, Bournes, Penny&Giles ect)) sound different, compared to a direct (source to poweramp connection) gives, maybe to their ears this is preferable.
But the Lightspeed Attenuator is all about listening to the source nothing added nothing subtracted warts and all. |
Ok, based on the reasoning that less parts and simplicity ALWAYS is truer to the source and more accurate, then this SS preamp certainly must deliver a perverted or somehow “additive” portrayal of the music compared to the LSA….. Also no tubes in this one….
http://www.balabo.com/amps/control/
I suppose one may think it, ague it, but the proof is in the hearing only. This highly reviewed and often touted pinnacle of preamps is full of parts. Looks at all those parts…
To actually get all of the nuances and notes off of that source requires a preamp that can actually extract it and amplify it. It needs to convey the dynamic contrasts and subtleties including those subtle micro and marco details. Perhaps a passive is, well, “too passive” to extract all of that information (on the source CD etc). This requires an “additive” (accurate gain) approach. Our stereo systems must be “additive” to even play a single note through a speaker. A passive may simply leave these higher order musical realities out – they may be subtractive. They may constrain or compress for lack relative drive. That is perhaps why, in my experience, I miss the depth, body and dimension with a passive. |
Fiddler, you are for some reason quite short with me in your remarks. No reason to be so strong with me and this is why.
1) My last posts had nothing to do with tubes at all. You keep bringing up the active preamp I own and digging up past posts that have nothing to do with the current topic. You take these past posts and apply them to a current thread totally out of context. I like tubes as you do. Tubes can bring warmth and other nice things. I am not arguing that and have not tried to in my last posts. Yes, we agree. Some tubes as you know are quite neural sounding. It is certainly possible for an active tube preamp to have a little more "warmth" but to also pass along many other things that are more revealing of the original event. More on this in a moment as this what I am most interested in digging into.
2) My interest in this thread is not on the level of my preamp vs. another. My scope is actually much broader and I was hoping to have some great dialog. I try to avoid bringing up the brand of preamp I own so we can have a broader discussion. Fiddler, you keep bringing it up? I have owned many, many active and passive preamps. Yes, the one I now own has pleased me well beyond the others, but that is not why I am on this thread. You seem to suggest I am not worthy of this topic and to stop having input on this thread.
3) As my last posts have pointed out. I think it is a reasonable and valid argument to suggest some aspects of music reproduction demand a preamp that has a great ability to powerfully attenuate. In fact, overbuilt to the point it looks like an amp. Big and powerful power supplies etc… Bass reproduction demands this kind of a preamp based on my experience. I am also suggesting other things like dynamic contracts, micro details and the like. That is why I gave the link to the $60,000 preamp considered by many experts to be the finest preamp available today.
Straight wire with gain! Yes, but the gain part is very important and the ability to really drive a system to realistically recreate the original recording is tantamount.
Certainly this is a realistic approach adopted by many first class companies. Some of these same companies offer both passive and active preamps. Most of them will tell you the active does the best job of recreating the recorded music. It is usually their very top of the line preamp – First sound, Placette ….
So yes Fiddler I think my points are worthy and not sophomoric in any way. |
