A big key was working with master tapes! This allowed us to know exactly what the recording really did sound like. Unfortunately this is not the case. You listened to tapes that were slowly deteriorating over time played on a tape deck that added it's own colorations played through speakers or headphones that also added colorations. Perhaps better than the CDs and vinyl I have but still not perfect. There is no way around this problem. |
Well, after six weeks of A/B evaluations, I have sold my CAT SL1 and am very happy with the Placette RVC. It works with great in my system - low output impedance single source, no gain needed, low capacitance cables (Cardas GR), and high sensitvity, high input impedance CAT JL2 amplifier. Sounds like the debate can go on forever, but in the right system, I think it is hard to beat a high quality passive preamp. |
I wish there had been a thread with as much cogent discussion when I was first considering a passive. Herman makes some very excellent points, especially with resepct to why it "works" for some and not others, so I won't belabor that issue. I have tried quite a number of linestages in my system, looking back, and the Bent NOH that I currently use is the best, by a pretty good margin. Better than several actives, both tubed and SS, and better than the passive Placette.
Steve McCormack has been developing his latest take on a cutting edge passive for some time now. I am anxiously awaiting this piece, expecting VERY good things. |
I just received my Placette RVC that I had them build with a 100K input impedance. I tried the stock unit but it was lifeless due to the high output impedance of my phono stage. This one works wonderfully. There is a price premium for the larger resistors due to an increase in his costs, but if you have the need as I did then it is well worth it.
I just love having a remote volume control! |
I agree 4yanx the Bent NOH is a terrific unit! I for one have no interest in active linestages any more(no matter the cost). If it ain't a TVC..I have no use for it.
FWIW Peter Daniels of Audio Sector is working on a RVC unit. Hopefully he'll have it completed and tested by spring of next year. I may try one of his to get a taste of the RVCs. The TVC is here to stay.
Good listening |
I own a placette rvc and an aesthetix calypso.
After 6 months living with both, I must confess that I prefer placette. Aesthetix is a very good pre and I bought it after making a home audition with hovland 100, hovland 200, first sound deluxe and vtl 5.5. Unfortunately it does not stand a chance against aesthetix in terms of speed, transparency, soundstage. |
Gmood1; I dont think you ever told us about the Bent NOH against the Promitheus on the TVC shoot out, what are your findings?
Best |
Jsadurni, I like both units. I couldn't pick a real winner. Both units sounded about the same too me. The Bent was setup with 6dB extra gain. So it wasn't easy to get a volume match on both units. The Bent is the better built of the two..being all metal. Performance wise..dollar for dollar the nod goes to the Promitheus. At the price..it is unmatched at what it does.. and far beyond the price. I had communications with several owners and people that have tried one out. It may surprise some the preamps and CDPs direct that have been pitted against the little guy.
Modwright,SAS,Conrad Johnson 17LS, Copland, Loecsh/Weisner and Wright preamps,Audio Research,Wadia 860 and Levinson CDP straight into amplifiers. That's just a few of the ones I've come across...the list goes on!
If you didn't take my advice before Jsadurni and pick one up earlier. The waiting list is so long now..it's almost insane!.. 2 to 3 months at least.
I ordered two more, one for me and the other for a friend..it slaughtered his Eastern Electric MiniMax..you'll see I've sold it on Agon recently...these two are the Reference versions with fully balanced trannies,solid silver RCAs, metal top/bottom plates and a few other additions to my basic version. |
Audiomadness, I'm confused by your statement: "Unfortunately it does not stand a chance against aesthetix in terms of speed, transparency, soundstage." Is the "it" the Placette you prefer to the Aesthetix, or to the group of other pres you auditioned versus the Aesthetix? I can't imagine that an active could beat a passive in terms of speed and transparency. Just looking for clarification. |
Pubul57, given my personal experience with 5 passive units, I suspect he is suggesting that any passive unit cannot give the speed, transparency, and soundstage of at least some active units. I personally value the purity of passive units caused, I believe, by their lack of parts, but I have never been able to tolerate the lack of their ability to give the pace of live music. This is largely the lack of dynamics and probably reflects their not having the matching of impedances that is present in active units. |
Tbg, just curious, were any of the passives a TVC design. If so could you mention which one. My understanding is that TVCs are not prone to the impedance mismatching issues that the resistor-based passives are prone to. Thanks |
Unfortunately this is not the case. You listened to tapes that were slowly deteriorating over time played on a tape deck that added it's own colorations played through speakers or headphones that also added colorations. This is not exactly true- the tapes were new, the tape machine was rebuilt and very stable and calibrated. This is the sort of thing that you apparently have to do in order to understand how powerful it is as a reference! I've seen audiophiles turn ghost white after being fooled by the direct microphone feed (startled at how *real* it sounds- far more so than any stereo using a recording can!). The value of working with master tapes is that you are there at the recording session so you *know* what the music is supposed to sound like. |
Well Tbg, I have the dynamics of active with my passive, carefull matching and testing was required but now I got transparency of passive and the dynamics of active... |
Pubul57,
Sorry for the confusion.
'Aesthetix' should be replaced with 'Placette' in that statement. The correct statement is 'Unfortunately aesthetix does not stand a chance against placette in terms of speed, transparency, soundstage'.
Regards, |
I agree about the careful system matching required with any passive, including a TVC. But when it all comes together, the dynamics, timing, bass extension, transparency...etc.... is all there in spades with a TVC. Mine has beaten some high dollar active preamps in my system and I have no desire to go back. However, with that said, my preamp does not sound good in all systems. If the matching amp doesn't have enough voltage gain, then all bets are off. As always, YMMV.
Oz |
TVC performance is still related to impedance matching. I had audiozone TVC passive which worked great with tube amps but was lifeless with pass lab amp ( inped 10K). You can look up the specs on S& B transformer in the desired attenuattion and see if it could work for you. |
Would someone tell me what a TVC design is? I have tried the Placette, the Silver Rock, the Reference, several quality pots with silver selector switches, and the Big Dog. |
TVC= transformer volume control.
It's a transformer with one primary (or two) and very many secondaries (20-30) each of which "transforms down" thereby offering a different level of attenuation.
Each secondary is connected to a different position on a multiposition switch which works as a "volume" pot. |
Gregm, thanks; so I guess the Silver Rock was the only TVC. |
Audiomadness. Thanks for the clarification - it makes sense to me now. There is obviously a lot of different experiences out there regarding the use of passives (I did not really know what they were 8 weeks ago). In my system I don't think an active can work better then the Placette. The speed, transparency, seperation of instruments, dynamics, bass etc - seems to all be there (an no maintenace). Not that I'm not wondering about the Placette Active, or what a TVC approach might do. But I think the CAT pre that I had and just sold must be considered one of the better active preamplifiers on the market, and in terms of sound quality I am more than satisifed having made the switch. My sense is that passives are "cult" items for the same reason that low wattage SETs are. In the right system they are magic, in the wrong system they can be less than inspiring. They requiring more thought in system building. I have enjoyed finding a low cost, SOTA alternative to active pres - perhaps the passives are less flexible, can't be universally applied, but with the right system approach, they are more than worthy contenders. I'd like to thank everyone for their input and experiences. It has been an interesting experiment. But, what about that Placette Active... |
People like Guy Placette and Emmanuel Go (who originally offered a passive design that is no longer avalailable) designed and built active preamps for a reason. |
"People like Guy Placette and Emmanuel Go (who originally offered a passive design that is no longer avalailable) designed and built active preamps for a reason. "
Which is???
I think Pubul57 puts it very nicely, "passives are a cult item" if you are able, and knowledgeable enough, and have the right system for it, it is "magic" : if one of the above is missing, it wont work: Then you can get the active.
If you swap equipment a lot you will need the active also.
But lets ask them!
Another issue which I dont think is fair to apply it but it is real: a Passive Preamp is pretty cheap and there is really no way of making it very expensive (unless you use silver transformers I guess); but an Active Preamp can be sold for a lot of money, even without silver transformers! |
FWIW, the issue you face with TVCs is hysteresis loss, which introduces low level distortion whenever the signal changes polarity (IOW- loss of low level detail). Additionally there will be changes in bandwidth depending on the tap selected. Careful design can minimize the latter but there is nothing to be done for the former- its a fact of life for all audio signal transformers except those in the current path of a single-ended device.
Since a single-ended device (tube or transistor) biases the core of the transformer, the zero crossing of the signal occurs at 1/2 the total saturation of the transformer- in effect there is zero hysteresis loss.
So- if you wanted to use a TVC this would be one way of doing that for those of you who are DIYers- combining the technologies. |
For those following this thread, I came to similar conclusions as Pubul57.
In my system, Placette Linestage (1500$) which I have borrowed from a friend totally DESTROYED my BAT 51SE. Much more transparent, VASTLY better microdynamics with all the natural color of music perserwed. My jaw literally hit the floor.
I tried long and hard to fine just ONE thing that the 51SE does better than the Placette, and I couldn't. Two weeks have passed and I'm still in awe. So much in fact, that I have ordered Placette RVC (1 input version) for myself. |
I think the controversy about passive line stages suggests that people listen for different things and that systems vary greatly. Much of the verbal discussion of sound is much like a debate about whether red or blue are the best color. |
Tbg, I think your opinion is very valid. I have a TVC and a battery powered active linestage. I think both have positives and negatives, although in my experience the TVC has less negatives. In fact, I have used both in the system at the same time with great results (DAC>TVC>Active>amp). I feel my TVC is truer to the sound, but my active is livelier. Just mt two cents worth. |
Tbg - you made a valid point. Depending on the music you listen to and your system, some aspects may be more important than the others.
I however, in my 2 week trial period, have tried all kinds of music, on my rather costly system and couldn't find a single aspect of reproduced music, that my old BAT 51SE would do better than the Placette Linestage. Not a single one !
And belive me - I have tried. I was looking especially close at things that passives are not supposed to do well - bass and dynamics, but they were both better through Placette Linestage than the BAT. |
Well one thing does seem for sure. It is worth trying the PLacette to see what you think in your system, with your music, with your tastes. To me it was revelatory. IN the end you may not like the passive route for whatever reason. But it seems to me that every audiophile should at least try one if possible. What I most notice is that instead of listening for sound attributes (bass, imaging, speed, etc.) I suddenly noticed that songs are more intellegible in terms of emotion and meaning. The point of the song was clearer to me. While I always like and search for "sound" improvements, this aspect of intellegibilty seems more profound and satisfying. That's the best I can describe it. |
I'm not sure how it can sound any better the the Placette Passive RVC, but I have decided to buy their Active Linestage (based on some comments and conversations I have had with other members). If you are interested, I have put my passive RVC up for sale today (January) |
I am surprised that as much as you like your Placette RVC that you are selling it without knowing for sure that you'll actually like the active version better. Why not hang onto it to do a comparison and then sell the one then that you like the least. |
Good advice. But I'll put money on you liking the Active at least as much and probably more. |
The active is coming this week so I will A/B them, but I'm not sure the active will sound better (that much better?)- but I am considering a Pass amp and I don't think the passive approach will work with them due to their very low input impedance - I think the active will provide more flexibility with low ipedance amps I may want to try in the future. The CAT JL2 (like most two amps) just happens to have a very good input impedance (100 kohms) for the RVC. |
|
I am VERY curious to hear what you have to say about the two Placette units, so please report back. |
Yeah, me too. Keep us posted. |
Well, I could not leave well enough alone. I got the Placette Active Linestage and it is unquestionably better than the passive - it took very little time to hear the improvement. That being said, the passive RVC is superb, good enough that I sold my CAT SL1 after hearing it. So we are talking very good to great in moving from one to the other.
I believe that the Placette RVC is working in the context of a very suitable system for a passive pre. I have high out put from the source, low input impedance and high input sensitivity with the amp (CAT JL2), and short runs of very low capacitance ICs (Cardas GR). In other words the RVC is in an environment where it should work ideally[?].
The RVC and the Active share many traits - quiet dark backrounds, transparency and clarity, good separation of instruments, air between instruments with no etching of images, beautiful natural mids.
The active is simply more alive and present - more real. With even deeper, better defined, more realistic bass and more detail and presence in the highs (drum cymabls for example). It has better micro and macro dynamics. Given the choice, I can't imagine anyone not prefering the active.
Now the RVC is $1000 and the Active is $5000. This makes the RVC a truly outstanding value. It was good enough for me to sell a very (rightfully) respected tube preamp (CAT SL1). The active is an excellent value as well. In the high end, we can't get into issues of deminishing returns - only you can decide if a certain level of improvment is "worth it" - as long as you have the budget to buy what you prefer. If funds were limited, I would have no hesitation using the RVC. If you can afford the Active, it is better, plain and simple IMHO. I would imagine that if Placette Active sold through dealers (they offer a 30-day trial period) would sell for $10,000 - and it would still be worth it, because it is the best preamp I have heard (others I have owned ARC LS 25, Lamm LL2, CAT SL1 Ultimate)and I don't have to worry about tube rotation, degradation, and heat (no transistor edge or glare either).
So in the final analysis it may or may not be the passive versus active design approach that made RVC so appealing to me; it just may be that Guy Hummel has designed a volume-control that is transparent and free of distortion common to most other preamplifiers I have heard. Is it the BEST? There is no BEST - but it is certainly a series of preamplifers worth considering. |
Great report, and may I say that I'm not at all surprised at the outcome.
Is your Active brand new? Because I believe Guy thinks they keep getting better over time. Like wine, or cheese. |
The better sound of the active unit comes as no surprise. The real question is whether the active unit is competitive with less expensive active units. |
Tbg, the nice thing about the Placette marketing model, is you can try it in your home for 30-days and determine how it compares with what you have. So they make it easy to answer the question for your self, directly, in your system, for your taste. I won't say something silly like it smoked the ARC,Lamm, or CAT, but I prefer its sound to theirs (they are all excellent units). Personal taste rules, but the Placette should be on the audtion list, not just with comparably priced units, but with anything out there, IMHO. |
Has anyone tried the Musical Fidelity Tube Buffer to address the impedence matching problems? Does this make any sense? |
Kensetsu, I think that does make sense. Do you have specs on the unit? Output impedance? |
Sure I've pasted it below:
Input impedance 470K Ohms
Output impedance < 33 Ohms
Total harmonic distortion < 0.004% 10Hz to 20kHz
Frequency response 20Hz to 65kHz +0, - 0.5dB
Crosstalk Better than 80dB, 20Hz to 20kHz
Signal / noise ratio
(reference full output) Better than 93dB unweighted
Better than 106dB 'A'-weighted
Valve (tube) type 6112 twin triode (two)
Power requirement 12 - 0 - 12 Volts AC 500mA
(via mains adaptor supplied)
Or you could check out this link: http://www.musicalfidelity.com/products/smlx/x10v3.html# |
I've been very reluctant to consider any component change as being "better" until I have played many hours of music that I am very familiar with through the new addition and then back into the older gear. Sometimes it takes months to realize that "different" isn't better, just different. Invariably, it's better in some areas, worse in others and generally just different.
After many years of playing around with stuff, I now have to do all the comparisons like I always do, but I finally settle in and just let the stuff wash over me for several weeks without listening critically.
It's kinda like true love...if you have to work too hard to make it work, it ain't right. That's why I like Audiogon so much. Try to get a dealer to loan out gear for more than a couple of days when often times it takes a couple of months to come to terms with new stuff.
Factory direct with 30 day returns is the high end business model of the future. |
Factory Direct with 30 Days is the only way to truly find the right piece, or by used on Audiogon, and if you don't like it sell for more or less the same price. I think this may take the thread in a different direction, but I think you make a good point about finding the right equipment for one's taste and matching equipment. I find it ridiculous to listen to a preamp at a dealer, try to evaluate it in a different room, with different speakers, different source, etc. What am I to make of the sound I'm hearing? It is impossible. I would rather rely on a consensus view of those on Audiogon that have tried the equipment, and then choose on that basis knowinf I can return or sell the equipment if it doesn't float my boat. The dealer experience just doesn't do it for me. |
A consensus view on Audiogon? Even were there such a thing, I would not trust it either. In reality we are dependent on an extended group of friends whose views and ears we trust. Most of mine will not post on Audiogon or AudioAsylum.
Why do I post and monitor Audiogon and AA? Once in a while I learn something valuable and sense enthusiasm in a post on a new product that causes me to fully explore it. The Stealth Dream power cords are such an example. |
Tbg, you are right. I guess I meant to say the "consensus" in my own mind that comes from filtering the various opinions of people who over time make sense to me. It is a good to have a dialogue with other enthusiast - the dealer experience has usually not been that informative - there have been some exceptions. I am greatful that someone built Audiogon. |
