TVC vs. active pre?


I'm using a Bent Audio NOH in my system, and love the sound - it's detailed, open, dynamic, coherent, musical and very immediate.

Whenever I talk to amp designers however, the universal preference seems to be for active preamps. My feeling is that if there are no interfacing issues between the pre and the power amp (sufficient voltage drive, no impedance or capacitance problems) that an active pre can't "add quality" to the signal. As far as I can tell, an active preamp provides buffering and gain. Absent any need for these, I don't see what benefits it can provide.

Is my assessment incomplete? Are the recommendations for active preamps simply based on the avoidance of potential interfacing issues in unknown systems?

I understand that a good active may beat a poorly implemented passive, but given good design/build in both situations, what would it take for an active to beat a good passive, especially a TVC? And specifically, has anyone gone from a TVC to an active? If so, what were the system issues that prompted the change?
128x128gliderguider

Showing 1 response by blptwp

I have an all tubed and vinyl only system and I have gone from active preamp to built-in passive TVC ( TX-102) in my custom made phono stage. One very noticeable differnce is increased dynamics, especially coming out from my Quad ESL 63 speakers, which is not known for it's dynamics. Also, frequency extremes do not seem suppressed. I would love to do a comparison on the same phono stage with TVC and resistor-based volume control.