I have two passive preamps and one tube preamp. The passives seem to pass along very balanced music and well defined bass, while my tube unit bloated those lower frequencies. However, I greatly preferred the midrange of the tube preamp which was rounder, more dimensional and absolutely involving in a way the passives couldn't match. And for that reason even with the muddier bass, I listen with the tube preamp in place because I love what it adds.
What does a pre amp do
I have been trying to get an answer to this question, but so far have not been enlightened
In a modern system, the role of a pre amp is really questionable.
Historically, a pre amp would provide quite a number of real functions such as source selection, impedance matching, maintain volume consistency from different sources, volume adjustment, mute, balance, even tone control, high/low filters
Today, most people have a single CD source with XLR interconnection, which standardized impedance and signal level. Some CD and DAC (such as wadia) has digital volume control. In fact wadia does recommend people to connect directly to their amps
At least in thoery, the best preamp is no preamp. Even the preamp manufacturers agree as evident by the extent they go to separating power supply, minimize signal path. Then there is the passive preamp
So here is the question, is preamp a historical appendix that audiophiles are afraid to get rid of due to the fear of missing out on some unknown elements of music. Or is it really a percived need created by good marketing programs to exploit audiophiles
The obvious answer may be to try it out with and without preamp in the same system. The results I have heard so far are controversial, some claims much better transparency and clarity while others claim there is a lack of dynamics and less musical
I do not believe answers from "experts" who happens to be in a sales position. They always give a very affirmative answer and yet refuse to let you do an A/B comparision.
Most modern preamps are an empty box, and do we need to pay high prices for a piece of equipment with no known function
In a modern system, the role of a pre amp is really questionable.
Historically, a pre amp would provide quite a number of real functions such as source selection, impedance matching, maintain volume consistency from different sources, volume adjustment, mute, balance, even tone control, high/low filters
Today, most people have a single CD source with XLR interconnection, which standardized impedance and signal level. Some CD and DAC (such as wadia) has digital volume control. In fact wadia does recommend people to connect directly to their amps
At least in thoery, the best preamp is no preamp. Even the preamp manufacturers agree as evident by the extent they go to separating power supply, minimize signal path. Then there is the passive preamp
So here is the question, is preamp a historical appendix that audiophiles are afraid to get rid of due to the fear of missing out on some unknown elements of music. Or is it really a percived need created by good marketing programs to exploit audiophiles
The obvious answer may be to try it out with and without preamp in the same system. The results I have heard so far are controversial, some claims much better transparency and clarity while others claim there is a lack of dynamics and less musical
I do not believe answers from "experts" who happens to be in a sales position. They always give a very affirmative answer and yet refuse to let you do an A/B comparision.
Most modern preamps are an empty box, and do we need to pay high prices for a piece of equipment with no known function