#11
|
|||
|
|||
I have yet to do a controlled direct a to b comparison when adding a pre amp into a system versus using good digital volume control where the pre amp was better. There was always a reduction of transparency, resolution, focus and space when adding the pre amp - as there should be when you subject the signal to more cables, connectors and analog componentry. No matter how good all of those things are, they need to reduce transparency. With an analog signal, the less you do to it, the better off you are.
To do a proper comparison, I have found that you need to use a great, simply miked recording - recorded in real space of natural acoustic instruments to do the evaluation. If using multi miked stuff then you have much less of an idea what it should sound like, and you may prefer the sound through the preamp - this doesn't make the addition of the pre amp truly better - you just "prefer it". |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Unless I am behind times, the only way to control volume in the digital domain, to reduce the amplitude of the signal is to reduce the values of the digital signal which in turn reduces the resolution of that signal. How is that better?
Last edited by PHC1; 10-19-2017 at 12:50 PM. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
2 words. Impedance matching.
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Theoretical versus practical when talking about the digital resolution loss versus the analog loss when using a pre amp. From my experience, the loss introduced by the analog pre amp is much greater. As I mentioned, I have done the direct a to b comparison ( in the same room, at the same time, on the same system, at the same volume) for over 15 years - done at a minimum of 30 times (most likely many more times than that). I have also yet to find anyone I have done the comparison for or have a different opinion as to the outcome. If using a proper recording that is simply miked and not processed - I have yet to find a pre amp addition improve things. I have used pre amps up to $30,000 when doing these comparisons. The most you can hope for is as little change as possibly when you insert the pre amp into the signal path. I know there are a lot of people who will disagree with these statements, but they are my opinion based on the comparisons I have experienced - not a theory of what will happen.
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
If there was one universal agreement or everyone had the same ears, taste and came to the same conclusion, there wouldn't be tube,SS, hybrid, digital, passive preamps or much of anything to choose from in audio. One universal design that made everyone happy would be in turn simplified, miniaturized, built in a country of cheapest labor and this hobby would cease to exist.
Last edited by PHC1; 10-19-2017 at 02:02 PM. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Right and the output impedance of a passive device varies with the setting of the volume control, often to a figure too high for the input impedance of some power amps, unless the passive is transformer based.
Last edited by PHC1; 10-19-2017 at 02:37 PM. |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Exactamundo...
__________________
Lumin P1 streamer/DAC/preamp, Constellation Inspiration integrated TT: Michell Gyro SE MkII, SME V, Koetsu Urushi Vermilion, EAR324. Harbeth 30.2s, REL R-305, Shunyata Alpha V2 ICs, Alpha V2 SPs, Sigma XC, Sigma NRv2, Omega QR-s & Alpha NRv2 PCs, segmented Altaira SG stack w/ Alpha & Omega CGCs, Everest 8000 PD. Remote Server Room: Uptone EtherREGEN, AfterDark Master Clock & LPS, Alita, Battle Angel, (Akasa NUC Roon Core), iFi DC Purifiers (for SMPS used for Alita & router), Shunyata Gemini combo power distributor & Altaira-type CG GP-NR hub, Venom & Alpha CGCs, Shunyata NRv14 power cords for digital components. |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
I have both flavors and am pleased with each in its appointed place.
An active (c-j Premier 17LS) control-centers my main system and a passive (Luminous Audio Technology Axiom II) volume-controls my single-high-level-source, acoustically-treated-to-death bedroom system. I posted my impressions of the matched-to-my-system Axiom II elsewhere in this forum last June. The takeaway: in-spades transparency, no perceptible constriction of dynamics, soundstage, or bass down to the lowest limit of my Paradigm Studio 20s working in that room driven by a 125-wpc Sonographe solid-state amp. If anything, it sounds a shade more neutral (or, if you like, less "warm") in that setting than the Premier 17LS does in the main system. And the output is "quieter" (no hum or noise) than it was with either the tube/hybrid Counterpoint SA2000 or the FET-based Sonographe SC25 in the same system. Overall take: Yummy. Which is all that matters to me. Jim
__________________
Jim Bedroom: Aurender N150-->Bryston BDA-3-->EMIA Elmaformer Cu passive line stage-->conrad-johnson MF2500-->Paradigm Studio 20 v.5 Wireworld Eclipse IC and SC Shunyata Delta D6, Alpha XC, Delta NR v.2, Alpha USB; Altaira CG Hub Stillpoints Aperture II; Ultra SS; Ultra Mini GIK Monster; 242 Butcher Block Acoustics Maple Platforms |
|
|
Audio Aficionado Sponsors | |