Missing in the chain below is a preamp - I use the DAC to control volume. This is my only source and will be for some time. What could I gain by adding a preamp?
I have Thiel CS 2.3s driven by a BAT VK-55, sourced by PS Audio PW DAC, with bridge II, mostly tidal. The DAC serves as a preamp in terms of volume control. Mostly Audioquest cables, amp power cord is Cardas Clear m, all fed by PS Audio upc-200.
I am am hoping to improve the highs, which sometimes sound smeared, too much sibilance; would like more air and clarity. Loud rock sounds flatter, less dynamic than I’d like. I am not willing to give up the deep detailed and beautifully resonant mids. Willing to spend up to $3000, used is ok. Totally balanced is a must. Not currently willing to entertain the idea of different speakers - my goal is to make the 2.3s sound as good as reasonably possible before moving on to other speakers. It’s easy to find a really good preamp in this price range, so much so I am almost paralyzed by the choices. Aesthetix , Ayre, ARC, several BAT, Parasound and more all have apparently excellent models in my price range. Patience would put Atma-sphere and PS Audio within reach. Which is best for my situation? There’s no way to audition all of these, how could I avoid getting on a preamp merry-go-round? Or should I spend my money elsewhere?
While this thread seems to have run its course, I’ll nonetheless ask for some guidance. I totally get the active vs passive discussion, having had placette and reference line one way back in the day and several actives since. i now have the lumin x1 and it’s Much better w an active pre. I’m interested in the Townshend Allegri ref, but gotta wonder how that could improve on going direct using the dac’s volume control. But I’ll guess that the external pre might improve because it has a better analog volume control than the digital, and better opportunity for impedance matching - however I’m likely wrong on the impedance bit when it comes to passives. Thx for any insights to the quandary
The way the volume is dealt with in the PSA PW Dac is pretty good. Upsampling, applying volume, then downsampling to somewhere around 2x DSD (if I remember right). Basically, beyond what you can hear.
It really takes a very special preamp to improve upon it.
I've tried some of the lesser Audio Research and it wasn't until I borrowed a Ref5SE I heard any improvement and it's still fairly small step forward.
Also try a different source, as I’m not convinced about the firmware fixing what the Stereophile reviewer heard because they didn’t do back-flips over it, which is kinda what your hearing too. As what they heard could be
interpreted as "smearing" also.
Thanks George! So far my conclusion re preamps is they can shape the sound (along with source and volume control), sometimes to great affect, but no guarantees that one will provide the specific improvements I am looking for. I was pretty sure impedance matching in my system was not a problem due to the BAT’s 215kohm input but glad you confirmed this. Firmware is up to date on the dac. So I think I need to experiment more with room treatments, especially the sidewalls, before tone control/dsd etc, my thinking is the smear and unwanted sibalance could be those high frequencies bouncing around the room much more than ideal. Sounds like the start of a new thread!
thosb BAT VK-55, sourced by PS Audio PW DAC, with bridge II, mostly tidal. The DAC serves as a preamp in terms of volume control. Mostly Audioquest cables, amp power cord is Cardas Clear m, all fed by PS Audio upc-200. I am am hoping to improve the highs, which sometimes sound smeared, too much sibilance; would like more air and clarity.
thosb Looking at all your specs: By going direct from PS Audio to Bat 55 and using the Bat’s volume control, specs below shows you have a perfect match with it and the most transparent and dynamic way you will hear your system. If your getting "smearing of the highs" putting an expensive preamp in the chain will not fix the problem, all it can do is color it more, the problem lays elsewhere.
Specs "The bat VK55 input impedance is 215kohms" "PS Direct Stream’s volume control is a no-loss design and may be used at any setting from 1 to 100 without fear of resolution loss. DirectStream also has two output levels available to users. Go to the setup menu on the front panel touch screen to select the best output level. The maximumoutput voltage at 1kHz was 2.85V balanced and 1.44V"
In the Stereophile review below of your PS dac they said below. This maybe colored by getting the very fine Shiit $149 http://www.schiit.com/products/loki an equalizer that a few here love for what it can do for a problem system, and you can send it back, if it don’t work.
" My first impression was that the PS Audio was rounding off the attack components of notes to the detriment of their sonic physicality, seemed a bit rounded off and lacking the immediacy of, say, Bricasti’s fine M1 DAC"
New firmware seemed to fix some of this, but the way they described it wasn’t convincing, to me at least..
Listening with new firmware Apparently, my thoughts on the DirectStream’s slightly distant, less-than-fully-textured sound were shared by someone at PS Audio: Unbidden, Paul McGowan contacted me in early June, alerting me to a user-installable firmware update aimed, he said, at "opening up" the sound—and, concomitantly, enabling the DAC to accept PCM files of sampling rates up to 352.8kHz. The new firmware (v.1.1.4) arrived the next day on an SD card; installation was a simple matter of powering down the converter, inserting the card in the rear-panel slot, powering the unit back up with the card in place, and, after reinitialization, removing the card. Anyone could do it. To get a handle on the update, I went back to Beck’s "Lonesome Tears"—and was pleasantly surprised by a very audible increase in texture and touch.
I would promise it a good power cord to keep it well fed, a variety of aftermarket tubes to keep it interested, isolation to keep it comfy, and oodles of fiddles and ABC to keep it dancing.
cbrents73 - good suggestion, thanks, as I continues to think about preamps, I thought that it would be nice to have bass management for future sub(s), and maybe the DSP and DAC on this unit is the icing on the cake!
I know you said your budget was $3k, but for $4k you should seriously look at https://www.anthemav.com/products-current/model=str-pre-amplifier/page=overview Good chance the DAC in this will handily outperform your PS - which you could certainly compare. The biggest benefit of the room correction. When you realize and resolve what the room is actually doing/contributing to your system, then
elizabeth - the Goldpoint is a very interesting idea, one worth trying, had one in the cart before remembering that these cost about the same as the Schiit Freya. Unless there's some obvious technical advantage in the volume control (neither use potentiometers, both use resistors) wouldn't it still make more sense to try the Freya? I guess the selling point for the Goldpoint is no distortion, vs ability to influence SQ with the Freya?
And almost forgot, I have been trying some NOS 6SN7s, old Russian tubes from Upscale, in place of the Sylvania Chrome Domes that came with the amp, which has been interesting so far, probably worthy of another thread. Bottom line - no big difference yet, but maybe still burning these old Russians in.
I have yet to get to the preamp auditions - I took elizabeth's advice and upgraded power cord for amp (Cardas Clear M), plugged it directly into the wall socket rather than the conditioner, and replaced the wall socket with a Furutech GTX-D(R) so far. All modest but noticable improvements. During the same time period, I added some isolation devices for the amp and source, and that is as far as I have gotten. Isolating the amp with wood platform and Iso's cones and feet made the biggest difference by far. In fact, now I am considering Gaias and Oreas too. Next big upgrade will be upgrading the source to PSA's DSD DAC. THEN I will move on to preamps, unless something else strikes my fancy in the meantime.
I have been told for over 2 decades that the shortest path is the best. So I have been going direct from my MSB Platinum DAC III with passive volume control into my amp.
I recently added a Backert Labs Rhumba 3 Extreme to my system. The difference the Rhumba has made was dramatic. It was like the curtains got pull back and I was hearing the music for the first time. Everything just sounded clearer; especially with low level details. Sound stage improved along with over all musical texture. Every note was conveyed with a sense of presence, especially with female vocals and string instruments. And the decay just goes on forever.
The Rhumba 3 Extreme has been the single best addition to my system in over 12 years.
I'm about to pull the trigger on the Benchmark HPA4 as a linestage and let it do the volume control that has been done by my Benchmark DAC2 HGC, which is feeding a VAC 200iq amp into Sonist speakers. The system currently sounds great, but most all reports on the HPA4 say it's a definite step up from the HGC in the DAC. I seem to have a weakness for odd products that claim some special quality, and I find myself curious about the new Linear Tube Audio MicroZOTL preamps. Anyone want to talk me out of the HPA4 and into the ZOTL? I suppose I could order both and return the lesser, but I hate returning stuff. Thanks.
Not to take your answer out of context, but - True! Aside from personal taste, there is a reason why, just because equipment and speakers measure ruler flat on the speck sheet, doesn’t always equate to how they will sound in ones home at the listening position. First: Our human hearing is not equally sensitive to all frequencies encompassed in the musical/vocal range (in general, 28-16K Hz, excluding harmonics) until the overall sound pressure reaching our ears is about 65db - which is actually moderately loud. If you listen @ levels below 65db (at your listening seat) no mater how good you think your hearing is, no mater how ruler flat your system measures on the spec sheet, both the lows and the highs will be rolled off and is why some pre amps, receivers and integrated amps have Loud or Tone controls. Second: Regardless of how ruler flat your system measures, every room and it’s aesthetics, will have an impact on how your system sounds. I am no longer much interested in ruler flat specs, but only what kind of a job everything does together, in my home, to make a musical and engaging performance.....Jim
I rework retro for a living, most of todays preamps have 3 or 4 op amps usually nec5532's, popping a brown may help.Now real preamps should have a pcb full of top end analog components..not a single caterpillar (ic) as an old valve mate from the uk explained to me..
Basically a preamp will make whatever a DAC does, but better. A preamp is a must have item in any hi end system. I was not enjoying my system and messing around so many things trying not to expend money on a preamp. I was partially convinced to buy a preamp. I did then bought a used hi end one. That was amazing. That was the best improvement I did I my system. Sounds were then clearer, better played. I think it is a good improvement you can do for your system. Today, if I had to start a new system, that would be my first bought. That is the brain of your system. The amp is the heart and the speakers are the legs.
Just discovered. Elac Alchemy DDP-1. From their new digital serie. May be of interest. Combine with streamer DMP-1. Has AES output which could be led directly to pro monitors with digital input. Becoming rather common.
Well, I am not going to chain together three pre-amps, at least not any time soon, but I do appreciate all the ideas!
elizabeth - I read with interest your thread titled "how do you know which component to upgrade" and found it very insightful, except for the fact that it ultimately didn't answer my question, not that I really expected it to :). But I am happily following your advice so far, as left for me on a similar post, kind of a false start to this one.
atmasphere - I am dedicated to keeping all things balanced.
mrdecibel - 85% of my listening, and nearly all of my critical listening, is a mix of Americana (Tidal's nomenclature, aka folk, alt-country, chamber pop, laurel canyon pop, jazz pop, non pop radio pop, alt/indy, some but not all rock-n-roll, etc) as well as jazz and classical, generally at 75-85 dBs. To my inexperienced ears, my system sounds pretty darn good for this type of music in my room. It just bugs me that when I want to rock out, the sound is not as enjoyable. Ditto the treble.
gosta - I love the Theils - for now. Speaker upgrade is well out over the horizon, but certainly out there, albeit way out in the future (2020 maybe?). My goal for now is to make the 2.3s sound as good as possible, maybe even upgrade the crossovers, before moving on.
all - sounds like there possibilities both ways, my conclusion so far is that ultimately what I am looking for COULD be achieved without a preamp, AND it's also likely that the RIGHT pre would also make me very happy. If the right pre is right to me because it colors the sound a certain way, perhaps I can get there following another path?
So far I have improved isolation of the amp (moderate improvement) and plugged it right into the wall outlet (also a moderate improvement). Next up is a Furutech wall outlet (Rhodium plating, "Rhodium especially excels in the high frequencies which are detailed and clear. Overall rhodium yields a super responsive, delicate, expressive and neutral sound…" - we'll see. Then I think I will try some NOS 6SN7s, old Russian tubes from Upscale, in place of the current Sylvania Chrome Domes. Upgrading the source to a PS Audio DSD is the next big component improvement. After that, speaker isolation? And then, maybe, the Schitt Freya, because it is balanced, gives me three modes of operation to play with including passive, (four if you count the Octal LISST option) but even more importantly, it can be returned (it will be a tough 15 days of burn-in and listening, but if I plan ahead, I think I am up to the task). And of course, room treatment will continue. Or maybe I will come across what could be the perfect pre-amp at a price that not buying would be very regretful, who knows, it could happen!
But, according to Paul, todays controls are extremely linear. He also
explained how even the best non-linear controls increase noise levels at
lower volumes, and can not compete with today's digital controls.
I can safely challenge the idea that analog controls are noisier than digital at low volume levels. The statement is false. So much depends on execution- a general statement like that just can't hold water. Preamps serve 4 functions: 1) control volume2) select the source3) provide any needed gain4) control the interconnect cable to the amplifier The OP does not need 2 and 3, but 1 is essential and 4 is the least understood. The problem is complicated by the fact that a balanced system is mandatory. FWIW there are no passive volume controls that support the balanced standard, which is there to prevent the interconnect cable from having an artifact (the 'sound' of the cable). For that matter there are not that many active line stages that support the standard (also known as AES48, the Audio Engineering Society file 48). But there are a few, and if a balanced system is thus set up correctly, then the interconnect cable will not influence the sound.
elizabeth, are you running your source signal through three different linestage preamps daisy chained and at the same time or I’m reading it wrong? Highly unusual setup.
To the OP, I will chime in....." Loud rock sounds flatter, less dynamic than I’d like ". Loud rock is not Thiel territory, and, with a tube amp ? Not to sound crude, but you have it all wrong. I am also a convert to passive, as I no longer want to "color " my recordings or hear less " detail and information " from my recordings with an extra gain stage or 2 that I do not need. I am the happy owner of a Luminous Audio Axiom II Walker mod unit, and have never been more pleased with what I am hearing from my recordings. Elizabeth.....3 separate gain stages ( Threshold to CJ to Bryston ). Really ? Enjoy ! MrD.
I’m not convinced an active linestage does anything needed, but might create a sound that sounds more dynamic
Could only sound more dynamic if the passive was hobbled with a serious impedance mismatch. As an active line stage cannot in any way improve the dynamics of the source.
George, I did say "create a sound that sounds more dynamic" not that it technically is. A little fatter bass often conveys increased dynamics. Passives seem more constrained in " creating a sound" but I'm interested in auditioning the Benchmark unit to see what they achieved with the best passive components.
Recently I was not pleased w/my sound. Same problem music was flat at the top end. Just lacked dynamics sound was flat. My amp in my case wasn't the problem. A Bryston 2.5 SST2. It was the tube preamp. A CJ ET3 SE. Sold it for a Luxman CL 38 U-SE more on the neutral side and the whole system just kicked in. In your case maybe a Bryston preamp might be the ticket. I think an all BAT system will really kill the top end of your 2.3's. All BAT to much warmth.
I'm afraid a real change in sound or dynamics demands other speakers. All the others are just adjustments to the existing sound. Thiel is a really fine speaker and I owe them a lot (still got several) but they are not the last word in anything. YMHO.
Agree that high power ss amps are the standard choice for Thiels in general, and the 2.3s impedance curve does NOT make them an exception. However, the BAT VK-55 sounds much better than my previous amp (Krell KAV 300-iL, 200 wpc at 8 ohm, doubling down to 4 ohm), maybe it's just the sound of tubes that I am enjoying? BAT literature suggests this amp should be capable of handling challenging loads - there's even a 2 ohm tap - that being said, I know I can do better amp wise. But to keep the sound of tubes and switch to high current ss amp means I need a tube pre-amp, and now I am right back where I started!?!
I owned a pair of 2.3's some years back and I think your problem is the VK-55. I had a pair of modified Threshold T-50's (converted to mono blocks). They were owned by a former employee at Threshold where they did the modification and my 2.3's came to life. High current solid state is the way to go w/2.3's. I was using is w/a Audio Research SP-16.
so that implies there is a role for separate linestages but theirs is a very sophisticated passive. Curious to hear the difference. I’m not convinced an active linestage does anything needed, but might create a sound that sounds more dynamic
Could only sound more dynamic if the passive was hobbled with a serious impedance mismatch. As an active line stage cannot in any way improve the dynamics of the source unless it has a dynamic range ex-pander circuit in it, and they sound rubbish.
Benchmark Media had claimed the best connection was their DAC using their built-in hybrid gain control (HGC) direct to amp. I agree that it sounds great, but they just announced a $2500 dedicated linestage for their DACs, so that implies there is a role for separate linestages but theirs is a very sophisticated passive. Curious to hear the difference. I'm not convinced an active linestage does anything needed, but might create a sound that sounds more dynamic or sparkly than straight wire with attenuation.
Superphon were very musical and one of the best values for the money ever made .They are very rare today and anyone you might find would need to be re-capped .
I use blown up retro nads as pre-amps. Have a 3225 and 3240..they sound amazing! better than my Harman avr. remove the outputs, main amp fuses and blown components.remove the link from pre out to power amp and you have a nad preamp for near nothing when you look at todays prices, most with phono.most of todays preamps which I can afford have 3 or 4 8 pin op amps.have a look at the nad preamp....its a work of art going back to the 3020 which defined stereo.
Several of you are claiming that digital volume controls are inferior to non-digital controls. Two or three days ago, I watched a video by Paul McGowan of PS Audio saying just the opposite. Yes, in the early days of digital, at lower volumes, the digital controls sacrificed word length at lower volumes, as they were controlled by one, or in a few cases, two 16 bit chips. But, according to Paul, todays controls are extremely linear. He also explained how even the best non-linear controls increase noise levels at lower volumes, and can not compete with today's digital controls. He further explains that that is why very few designers today use anything but digital controls. You can believe what you want, I'm just throwing in what one industry biggie thinks on the subject as food for thought.
nice tube preamp mated to SS amp is the way I would go .... i would agree with this ..... I actually have croft 25r (tube rolled with NOS) which is a very sweet hybrid pre amp and way under budget going into ATC P1 / Harbeth
it isn’t balanced however but my cable run is only 40cm.
of all the setups over the years this mix of valve early on and then tranny power has the control, dynamism and smoothness I love. 2 years on I still tap along to music thinking WTF every few songs .... in a good way
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.
