Avgoround,
I believe the source that was originally being considered as a substitute for a preamp was an Oppo BDP-105. The Oppo has very low output impedance and sufficient level to drive nearly any amp to full output. I use three analog sources, a Parasound JC-3 phono stage, an Ayre C-5xeMP, and stereo from an Oppo BDP-105, so I use a JC-2 to switch among them. I have tried the Oppo direct to my Proceed HPA 2 & 3 amps, and the sound is superb with no lack of dynamic range -- remember, any amplification amplifies both signal and noise, so doesn't change S/N. Even though I use a preamp for stereo, the surround outputs from the Oppo go directly to the amps.
db |
ANYONE FOLLOWING THESE LAST FEW POSTS REGARDING PASSIVE PREAMP FRONT END VS ACTIVE, PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING STEREOPHILE ARTICLE FROM COREY GREENBERG,NOV 1991 STEREOPHILE MAG BELLOW
http://www.stereophile.com/solidpreamps/54/
..then you'll all understand my troubled frustrations and shortcomings with the passive thing over the years... |
Yes, I too had played with the old Adcom gfp 750 (forgot about that) and that was at least 12 years ago. But, with whatever CD sources I tried, the active setting sounded definitely weighted and more punchy than the more closed-in sounding and subdued, dynamically, passive setting! Once again, even though the passive setting was clearer n less colored, rock n dynamic stuff had more soul n powerful overall sound in active...that's just what I found, and Im pretty certain I sold that piece retail in two different WiFi stores at the turn of the century! ...in fact I'm also certain that we sold other ACTIVE preamps then, that were much superior over the passive adcom setup,if I recall. In fact Im pretty certain just about every hiend audio equip you could think of produced better sounding top end preamp during that time, of which the Adcom was no match, if I recall correctly?! I mean if the passive section of that 750 was that good, why wouldn't more reviewers using them as reference pieces in their own systems???!
Anyway, what was I missing then?... |
Ive used McCormmack TLC and Pass Aleph L passive preamps mostly, plus DIY passive volume attenuators and, of course direct DVD player to amp combinations mostly, for my passive experimentation.
Now granted, I've not played with passive setups in at least 8 years, honestly. But my experience with many amp and passive or direct combinations pretty much exclusively has always yielded me less than optimum dynamic results from the sound, and so I just gave up trying, to be truthful!
Now it may very well be possible that the combination of source components and interconnect cabling which I used, was running into impedance issues, and the CD players nowadays very well might be offering lower output impedance than previous units I experimented with (plus maybe I didn't consider restrictions from cabling being an issue there either???), allowing for better signal flow between the components, for more dynamically unrestricted sound, but I'd have to go back and experiment and research some more. Dunno.
I was reading a recent article where more than a couple of posters stated they also experience a " loss of dynamics and some compression in the audio signal going passive,too! So I definitely know that others have had similar experiences as I had in the past..so it's not just me! However, why aren't nearly ALL magazine professional industry reviewers MAINLY using high end ACTIVE preamps as a reference in their own systems, if passives work and sound better/more pure sounding???! That makes no sense.
I did also read this article from a year ago, claiming that passive preamp require careful cabling and source component selections for good results from passive preamp, so maybe that's it.
Maybe I really DO need to go back to experimenting. Because certainly I'd MUCH rather be able to ditch a preamp in the chain altogether. If I can simply get the full dynamic capability from my sound, large open, unrestricted full soundstage that I've experienced with the best high end preamp I can get?! ..maybe my old Card as and Harmonic Tech interconnects were either not compatible with my DVD player n amplifiers impedance matching compatibility, and combinations were simply not compatible with each other? Hmmmm...
immature need me some more research n tinkering, I guess. If anyone out there who listens to occasional Metalica, eclectic world beat, hip-hop n pop, rock, and even movies through their 2 children system, and they exclusively use a passive front end setup with great dynamic results, in their opinions, ..lemme know what you are using in your setup, if you'd be do kind?!!!! I'd like to try out your combo, fer sure. Otherwise, my results of trying paramount amps w built in volume controls, high quality attenuation n DVD players w built in volume haven't cut it for me, compared to better active...is all I'm sayin.
Yes. I'm willing to be enlightened, otherwise, and shown the error of my past ways... |
"I did also read this article from a year ago, claiming that passive preamp require careful cabling and source component selections for good results from passive preamp, so maybe that's it."
You're right. That is it. Passives can be great, but there's a lot of equipment out there that doesn't work well with them.
"I do think I'll experiment, but am guessing already that the quality of a passive that I'm looking for will be too expensive. I'll probably start with a Placette Passive Linestage to at least see if I like it better than the Emotiva and then go from there by comparing with a good active in the same price range ($1500 used most likely)."
See if you can find an Adcom GFP-750. Its both active and passive, so you can switch back and forth between the 2. It also has a remote and is balanced. |
Ive used McCormmack TLC and Pass Aleph L passive preamps mostly, plus DIY passive volume attenuators and, of course direct DVD player to amp combinations mostly, for my passive experimentation.
Now granted, I've not played with passive setups in at least 8 years, honestly. But my experience with many amp and passive or direct combinations pretty much exclusively has always yielded me less than optimum dynamic results from the sound, and so I just gave up trying, to be truthful!
Now it may very well be possible that the combination of source components and interconnect cabling which I used, was running into impedance issues, and the CD players nowadays very well might be offering lower output impedance than previous units I experimented with (plus maybe I didn't consider restrictions from cabling being an issue there either???), allowing for better signal flow between the components, for more dynamically unrestricted sound, but I'd have to go back and experiment and research some more. Dunno.
I was reading a recent article where more than a couple of posters stated they also experience a " loss of dynamics and some compression in the audio signal going passive,too! So I definitely know that others have had similar experiences as I had in the past..so it's not just me! However, why aren't nearly ALL magazine professional industry reviewers MAINLY using high end ACTIVE preamps as a reference in their own systems, if passives work and sound better/more pure sounding???! That makes no sense.
I did also read this article from a year ago, claiming that passive preamp require careful cabling and source component selections for good results from passive preamp, so maybe that's it.
Maybe I really DO need to go back to experimenting. Because certainly I'd MUCH rather be able to ditch a preamp in the chain altogether. If I can simply get the full dynamic capability from my sound, large open, unrestricted full soundstage that I've experienced with the best high end preamp I can get?! ..maybe my old Card as and Harmonic Tech interconnects were either not compatible with my DVD player n amplifiers impedance matching compatibility, and combinations were simply not compatible with each other? Hmmmm...
imma need me some more research n tinkering, I guess. If anyone out there who listens to occasional Metalica, eclectic world beat, hip-hop n pop, rock, and even movies through their 2 children system, and they exclusively use a passive front end setup with great dynamic results, in their opinions, ..lemme know what you are using in your setup, if you'd be do kind?!!!! I'd like to try out your combo, fer sure. Otherwise, my results of trying paramount amps w built in volume controls, high quality attenuation n DVD players w built in volume haven't cut it for me, compared to better active...is all I'm sayin.
Yes. I'm willing to be enlightened, otherwise, and shown the error of my past ways... |
"Just remember, you WILL be losing out on the dynamics side of things, in absolute terms, going the passive route with your thiels!" Why would you make such a claim, Avgoround? What can an active preamp do for dynamic range? It amplifies both signal and noise, so S/N is determined by the source. If the level of the source is sufficient to drive the amp to full output, as that of an Oppo BDP-105 is likely to be, I see an ideal preamp as a device for switching among analog sources and passing the signal without degradation. Of course, if you're into tone controls and such . . .
db |
Avo-
What good passive pres have you listened to?
By properly oversimplifying the initial signal do you mean properly preparing the input signal for the input of the amp? If not what do you mean by oversimplifying?
I do think I'll experiment, but am guessing already that the quality of a passive that I'm looking for will be too expensive. I'll probably start with a Placette Passive Linestage to at least see if I like it better than the Emotiva and then go from there by comparing with a good active in the same price range ($1500 used most likely).
Thanks,
Hazyj |
Just remember, you WILL be losing out on the dynamics side of things, in absolute terms, going the passive route with your thiels! I'll put a good active preamp up against a passive approach, virtually every time, from my years of exerience,when it comes to properly producing dynamic transparency from a system. Not properly oversimplifying the initial signal before the amp section, will cost you in that area. I know...used to use direct from DVD and CD players -as well as both Mcormmick and Pass L preamps - in conjunction w many many different amplifier choices, with several Thiel loudspeakers (stereo n multi config). ..it's MUCH, stronger dynamically using a high quality active preamp in the system!
Just something to consider. ..maybe experiment??? |
One can prefer whatever preferences one has, but the Emotiva UMC-200 does not best the Oppo 105. It sounds like you've been buying and selling components frequently. I advise slowing down. Don't buy the XMC just because it's being released. Give it time to make sure it doesn't have bugs, and that Dirac has been implemented properly. Dirac isn't even included yet. They want you to buy it with the promise that Dirac is coming!
I don't know why they didn't wait to release it until it was ready with Dirac. Some suspect Emotiva was cash strapped and needing to see some return on their(6 year) investment in the XMC. I suspect they released it early to temp Emotiva buyers away from the new format that's coming, Dolby Atmos, something they don't have. Either way, it's been an uneven and jerky ride waiting for them to come up with an XMC to sell, so I'd be a little patient. After all, it's outclassed in the feature department by almost any 1000 receiver with pre-outs. |
I oppted for the Emotiva over the Oppo 105 as the analogue dacs sounded rather thin in the midrange/bass due to the high resolution and extension it has.The Emotiva beat it in 2/5 channel analogue hands down. Great eq-ing in the emotiva. Also, if you have different speaker ranges or sizes the oppo can only crossover everything at the same value - no independent crossovers. I found with the oppo for 2 channel with a subwoofer the front speakers need to be on small for the sub to run hence if you have full range floorstanding horns like me you can't run them large( full range) and utilize the sub for the lower ranges below 35hz. In home theatre 5.1 the sub will work either way. I sold my 105 and purchased the 103 for just the video processing which is identical to the 105 and saved $650 dollars. I am awaiting the Emotiva XMC-1 to try and see how it measures up compared to the UMC-200. |
Thanks all. I'm not going the theater route, though I'm sure I'll have fun with that at some point. At this point separates make the most sense for me as I'm trying to keep it all really flexible - I've got a DAC and a passive 2-ch pre on the way. That's the plan ... for now:-) |
I too have the OPPOS but recommend a preamp or processor if theater is your thing, They are more versitle |
I concur with Tim's recommendation of the Oppo BDP-105 as an acting digital processor, but it will not accept analog source. I select among three analog sources, so I use a JC-2 preamp for stereo, take surround from the Oppo directly the amps, and SW directly to a bass manager. When used with the Oppo for surround or HT, the JC-2 is set to unity gain. If you have only digital sources, the Oppo is likely to suffice. |
Hazyj,
I'm kind of late to this thread and don't want to dissuade you from getting a good 2-ch preamp. However, I have a suggestion that worked for me and may work for you.
I'd urge you to consider purchasing an Oppo-105 Bluray player for about $1,100. I bought one of these and I've been thrilled with its performance. Here are some advantages of the Oppo in your situation:
1. It has a built-in 7.1 surround processor that is very good and would lessen your need for your UMC-200.
2. It can double as a surprisingly good 2-ch music preamp. I actually no longer use my VTL 2.5 preamp for 2-ch music or my older Parasound surround processor for ht since installing the Oppo.
3. It can also be utilized as a very good stand alone dac if you ever decide to incorporate hi-rez computer audio into your system.
4. You also gain a highly reviewed and respected source for a wide variety of optical discs for both music and ht (cd, sacd, dvd, cd-rom and bluray).
Just something a bit different to consider,
Tim
|
Thanks all. After posting I decided to go in the direction you're advising, so great validation to know other minds agree. I see no reason to not at least audition a nice 2 ch pre and have fun comparing it to the Emotiva. Will need to post a comparison test at that time.
Avgoround - am curious - I think this is the first time I've heard anyone describe a Thiel speaker as "laid back". I understand you qualified that as meaning for HT, but can you explain?
HJ |
A brand new processor from Emotiva? A little bit on the risky side, and he'd have to keep the UMC-200 to get the discount, so he'd still be out of pocket 2 grand. Plus, the XMC doesn't have the Dirac room correction yet, so for 2000 or 1500, there's plenty that beat it hands down. And they don't have bugs.
I concur with the idea that hazyj should take his time and develop a complete solution/plan of attack before replacing just one or 2 components. Perhaps it would help for him to list what he has now that he wants to replace. |
As much as I LOATH ZD542, I kinda concur. :-) If you're going "music speakers", and focusing on improving 2 ch, then you should go dedicated 2 ch amp/pre and maybe separate the two systems for maximum.
For one, the Theils 2.7's are gunna be too laid back to properly do justice to HT, in my opinion (I've had 3.6's 2.3's, MC1's, 1.5's and 2.3's in my systems over the years).
If I had to go Thiels for double duties, I'd probably lean the powered monitors they sell, or maybe 1.6's in passive.- you want more presence from your ht system, or you'll lean into the sound, which isn't thrilling or involving for proper HT, IME.
Still, I'd go dedicated movie speakers for the HT, if I could...maybe running a pair of your preferred 2 ch speakers in conjunction with looped in AV pre/pro (you're processor is likely fine), running a 5.1 ch dedicated HT monitor system and sub for movies.
I think this topic has be exhaustively covered over the years. |
"Thiel CS2.7 (or something just as transparent if I find it)
Amp to match the Thiels (Pass Labs x-150, Peachtree 220, suggestions?)
I realize it's a pretty open ended question, but can someone suggest other 7+ multi channel pre/processors to match the above hypothetical system?"
I wouldn't do it this way. To be honest, its reckless. If you are looking to get a pair of cs2.7's (or similar), there's a lot to consider. Even more so that you'll be using them for HT. Its not a forgiving speaker and you really need to match the components for it very carefully. Given that, I wouldn't be too fast to use a HT preamp for 2 channel. It would probably be a better option to keep your Emotiva (I'm assuming it has a HT pass-through), and just get a good quality 2channel preamp. If you mess up with the preamp (for 2 channel), the system will never sound right, and you'll go nuts trying to fix it.
Take your time and listen to some components. Make sure you know what you want for your 2 channel setup, and then built the theater around that. Its much easier and you'll probably save a lot of money. |
Emotiva *finally* released their XMC-1 preprocessor. It lists for $1995. However, because you purchased a UMC-200, you are eligible for a 25% discount, making your cost $1495. There is nothing anywhere near that price that compares. Take a look here: http://XMC-1.com
-RW- |
