The amp is a GRAAF iti 50/50 tube amplifier, 50W, input sen of 1.4V
and the choices are:
A. Placette (passive linestage) to keep the system simple and clean, the amp has good numbers B. McIntosh C15 (solid state with phono)keep things from getting sluggish, don't need a prephono, C. Audio Note M2 (tube with phone)
Tvad, I'm telling you it's bizzare, better bass definition and clearer, cleaner highs...what gives?
I've been looking for this and the texture I use to have and it was right under my nose. I don't think the premier 14 has it compared to the pv10. I've tried several cable combinations trying to get it back, put the pv10 in and whoa! there it is!
Tvad, it does sound warmer, richer, cleaner highs, better seperation, better tonality all around. This was not the case when these preamps were connected to a Classe amp which has an input impedance of 47K.
I am using ARC VTM120 SE and pair it to Lumley Reference LV1 preamp. I would like to upgrade my preamp and there are two choices that pop up:
1. EAR 868 2. Aesthetix Calypso
Which one is better? I am spinning LP12, with Moon LP5.3 RS and its dedicated power supply, Siltech LS188 speaker cable, Stealth Meta Carbon interconnect, Stealth PGS 3D interconnect, Siltech Octopus Reference power distributor, Ensemble Elysia speakers.
I listen to lots of classical musics, jazz, some pops. Thanks guys.
how can i prefer them when i haven't heard them. the list is an indication of the preamps i want to investigate. there is no preference for any of them. i may not like or purchase any of them. i am not recommending them or saying anything positive or negative about them. it is just a list.
there is nothing subjective about the list. they are 4 tube preamps. i could have added the conrad johnson et2, but i doubt i will be able to audition it.
the only subjective aspect is my intention to audition them. i hardly think an intention to audition a preamp is an opininion.
anybody care to chime in ?? if a person has an opinion about something which has yet to be experienced, it is a prejudice. are you suggesting i have a prejudice toward any of these preamps ?
That's what I thought lower output impedance for lower input but this one shocked me. I'm using MIT 350 ref 1 meter which has a higher capacitance I believe.
as i understand, a preamp with a high output imedance, say over 600 ohms needs to see an amplifier's input impedance of around 50,000 ohms or more. the interconnect cable length and capacitance are also relevant.
you are wrong. my quartet of choices does not represent an opinion. it is just a list of preamps. check your definitions of words. there is a difference between facts and opinions.
my 4 selections are not opinions they are statements of the existence of these products. if i say "mcintosh", is that an opinion ? i think not.
the more obvious is my statement "don't rely on opinions", which is an opinion. i'm surprised you did not acknowledge the paradox.
one's ears as has been said many times, are more useful than second-hand opinions.
Larryi hit the nail on the head. This has certainly been my experience time and again. My most recent example is a CJ pv10 and premier 14. While the 14 was under repair I put my spare pv10 in and the result was an incredible improvement. They were driving Mcintosh 501's which have a low input impedence - the pv10's output imp is around 800 while I believe the 14 is around 200, I'm guessing that's the reason? The synergy is clearly better in every area.
i owned the sonic euphoria passive preamp. it was too focused for my taste, almost to the point of being analytical.
of the four preamps mentioned, i suspect the cary is the least likely to be bought, unless i replace the caps and substitute audionte copper/oil, or mundorf silver.
Mrtennis if you thought the UV didn't sound like a tube preamp, then you will probably love the Cary. I say this because it is the typical (what people think of) tube sound. Warm and lush, but not resolving or detailed. I owned the UV2 and thought it had just enough tube goodness, but with resolution and dynamics the Cary can't muster.
That being said, I now own the Sonic Euphoria PLC which is better than either. And I would highly recommend it to the OP or anyone else who has a passive friendly system.
I have found that the LEAST predictable interaction is between preamp/linestage and an amplifier. A lot of times, a combination that I think will work well does not do so at all. This is a must experiment situation.
Tube preamp/linestages, in particular, seem unpredictable. When the combination is bad, the sound will often be lifeless, bloated in midbass and murky. The opposite is also true -- when things work out there is a kind of hard to explain "magic" that is much more difficult to obtain with solidstate gear.
If you can find dealers that will work with you, I suggest that you work out home trial. The dealers I work with will allow home trial of electronics. If you are buying the Placette new, you have a home trial period.
I think you have made a reasonable list for a start -- one solid state, one passive and one tube unit. However, one should not, based on these particular models, rule out a particular type -- synergy with a particular model is a BIG factor.
i too am looking for a preamp, but i do not like the ultraverve. i had the opportunity to purchase it and auditioned it for a while. it doesn't sound like a tube preamp.
my choices are:
audionote kits l2, audiovalve eklipse, cary slp98 with audionote upgrade caps and art audio 1.
yes these choices are subjective, but the comments re synergy i think have no basis in fact. listen to them and decide whether there is synergy. don't rely on opinions, especially from biased audio dealers.
I, too, would be wary of your choices -- not because they are bad products but because of their "synergy" -- except for the passive. (For the latter, check your amp's specs, of course, or ask Placette directly)
BTW, why not get a used CAT pr? Plenty of dynamic content & driving energy to make yr Graaf sing.
Yes the Lightspeed is quite good if a passive will work in his system. I own one and have to agree that it is transparent without sacrificing anything in the mix. I was also under the impression that the Lightspeed was pretty much immune to impedance matching since it uses the photo optic technology.
I might also suggest that if a passive is desired then an autoformer or transformer volume control passive could be an option as well.
Everything I have experienced from active preamps (both tube and ss) with no grain, grit, glare, etc. and with typical passive transparency. So far, I have detected no discernible weaknesses, but evaluation continues. The only caveat is that the output and input impedances need to be compatible.
Here is a thread that may be helpful. Although it is a DIY forum, the author of the thread manufactures the Lightspeed for $500 US. In other words, if you aren't a diy person, it is available commercially.
I believe this thread is approaching 250,000 hits.
When you consider system synergies and personal tastes, opinions may differ of whether to go active, passive or direct without a preamp. But recently I've become a believer, as many other have, that a good quality active preamp can do wonders to your sound system.
With my 2 channel system - (Wadia 861>>Leben CS600 Integrated Tube amp (32w/ch) >>Harbeth SHL5 speakers) - I was able to try different configurations using a integrated preamp, external preamp and no preamp at all. My Wadia 861 has a variable (digital) volume control and the Leben amp has the option of bypassing the preamp section to function as a power amp.
Running the Wadia direct into the Leben (used as a power amp) the transparency and clarity increased but at the expense of some harmonic leanness to the sound.
Using the Leben as a integrated amp (connecting the Wadia into the Leben's CD input) the sound filled out more and overall seemed better balanced and less fatiguing in comparison to the above.
But when I inserted an active preamp (Luxman C7f) to the power amp inputs of the Leben, there was a remarkable improvement to the sound. The most profound effect was how my Harbeth's came to life and open up with increased bass definition and extension. Music flowed more effortlessly with a natural ebb and flow that was slightly more upbeat than before. I did lose some transparency but not much, which was countered by richer harmonics and a greater sense of continuousness to the sound.
In my system the numbers match up well (sensitivity and impedances). The Leben amp itself is well endowed with large high quality transformers and components. However, perhaps it's more than specs that need to be considered. From my recent exercise I'd say active preamps (of good quality) do what their designed to do and that is amongst other things provide power drive to an amp and speakers. Try before you buy if you can.
Well you have narrowed it down to all the wrong choices. I think, though I have never heard the Graaf that it is probably a really good amp, You might consider two preamps. One I am a dealer for deHavilland and the other I have a really good feeling for the Shindo, The deHavilland is just killer. So much music. I keep upgrading the system and the deHavilland Ultra Verve just keeps stepping up. Meaning that it might fit into an 80,000 system without a flinch. Check out their website at dehavillandhifi.com
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
