I really love the topics and explanations that you talk about. As someone that's try to learn about hifis and how all the bits fit together these videos have been really helpful.
What is wrong in your mind that motivates you to make such a slanderous comment? What are your credentials Pepe? Could you please link us to your audio videos?
Just shading some light on to why one could make such comment, as PS Audio does dabble into more 'questionable' audiophile power technology... along with their no doubt quality audio hardware.
I used a highly regarded passive preamp for several years, then borrowed a BAT preamp from a dealer. The sound improvement was so great, I bought it. When I went to a separate DAC (Benchmark) which had a headphone amp, I tried using it direct to the power amps, but the stereo image shrank to half size, so I put the preamp back.
Totally agree on the need for a good pre-amp. Back in the late 80s/early 90s, there was a push for passive preamps. I came close to building one until I heard one demo'd at CES. It sounded dull... A good pre-amp provides a vital gain stage to the signal, especially in analogue.
I like tube preamps mixed with solid state power amplifiers. When you have tubes in both power amp and preamp the sound becomes too pillowy for my taste.
I prefer solid state preamp and tube amp. Keeping the signal at lower distortion before it reaches the tube amp. Also always have a solid state source for these reasons. Of course I've gotten good results the other way around too. But I will always have a solid state phono preamp and DA converter.
Every single time I have a question about audio, I Google it, and end up watching one of your videos. Thank you for what you do for us audiophiles! In this case, I had answered my own question and just wanted to make sure I wasn't crazy. My story: For several years I had been using a Universal Disc Player, which has a digital preamp, as a source in my A/V system, and running it straight into a power amp. It sounded ok, but truly lacked pizazz. A few days ago I decided to put an old headphone amp (from another system) between the two, and the results were absolutely astonishing. It was actually just dumb luck; the headphone amp I am now using as a preamp is Class A, balanced, with XLR inputs and outputs. So yes, preamps can make a HUGE difference. But as everybody knows, it all depends . . . .
I have heard sound systems that made me feel like I was In the studio. I agree with anything that brings that experience closer to my audience. (Ray Charles)
Besides convenience and amplification, a preamp often solves impedance related issues , like capacitor coupled connections with high output impedance and low input impedance resulting in poor frequency response.
I personally think a good quality pre does more to improve the sound than the power amp. Yes, you have to have a power amp that will drive the load, w/o clipping, but that being a given, the pre is king.
I have a pioneer set to 3/4 volume going into a eq then a line driver. The output from the line driver enables me to have the gain down all the way on my amp which also helps my amp work less and have wetter bass = sound quality skyrockets. For only 600wrms on 1 ct sounds 18 she gets down. even if you have a aftermarket head unit (a preamp/line driver is a must in my opinion)
I have found the same thing. I even owned some older PS Audio preamps with the "straight line" option (5.5, 6.0), and preferred it with the line stage engaged. I'm pretty sure that it all comes down to impedance matching, and the inability of the source component's line output to drive some cables and power amp inputs effectively, especially when buffered by the passive volume pot. Impedance matching is one of those topics that too often gets ignored in high end audio.
I was using an integrated amp as a pre for years. It worked on standby, so I don't think it was doing anything other than connecting two signals through a volume control. Didn't detect a difference pre-less. Recently replace that with a dedicated pre and wow. Tighter and better controlled bass, more detail and dynamics and the instruments have more attack. Some signal gain too it seems.
Pretty general question. Answer is yes and no, depending on the preamp. My preamp is a homebrew 76 triode tube with a 6688 tube as a current source. I keep it's volume at 10 and use the Kimmel Mu Stage fed 6550 amps volume control. It sounds harmonically rich and ever so dynamic with digital sources. For cassette and vinyl I use the preamps volume control. Loves me some 2nd order harmonic harmonics at over 100 dB. Only for short sessions though. Then the volume goes back to 80dB or so.
Before even watching the video, YES. I just ran 2A3 mono blocks with their own volume knobs. Very short signal path. I then tried them with a Sonic Frontiers SPL-2 as good a preamp as has ever been made. The dynamics were better, and the sound stage was bigger. Trust your ears , sometimes the short path logic is proven wrong.
You should probably distinguish between the pre-amplification necessary for bringing up the signal level of a phono cartridge from a piece of a volt to signal level equivalent to the output of a CD player or other device, and on the other hand, simple attenuation/adjustment of the signal level of a CD player. The phono input is subjected to whatever the quality of that pre-amplification circuit, whereas the CD input is not. Having said that, the preamp, or what I like to call the control device, may or may not have an audible effect on sound quality for those devices whose input is already at signal level and is simple selected for and sent on to the amplifier. I would love to hear your comments on this.
Actually, they do. They give the sound body. The reason is the balance between voltage and current. They depend on each other. Voltage is the signal. Current provided by a preamp stops the voltage varying, especially if you were using a resistive ladder network.
Sylvester, You are missing the fact that, if you´re not using a preamp you are most probably using a DAC attenuating the signal. DACs do a lot of math while doing this, and no matter how good the DAC is, doing this kind of math will alter the signal as well. I have a DCS Scarlatti and a Griphon Pandora Preamp, I've played with this stuff and I must say; I preferred the sound of the system better with the Preamp hands down !
@@crventura The Griphon Pandora Preamp is $46,000! and I bet at that price range you've been ripped off completely in audible blind tests that you refused to endure for less pricey preamps you could have purcahsed.
Hi Razer, that is definitely a no problem I have plenty to spare. I buy my audio gear under a cost no object principle. So, don’t feel sorry for me, there’s no need. Cheers from Portugal
I have a Rotel RB-980 BX power amp and an old Hafler pre-amp. I switched my pre-amp out with an Adcom GFP-1 and WOW! What a difference! My Monitor Audio Silver 300's came to life! So, yes, in my case a better pre-amp SURE enhanced the sound.
I respect such elegant explanations. I always wondered why can't I feed a power amp directly through DAC, which never sounded better than with a high-end preamp. Thanks.
Saturation and harmonics are what my ears love. For that reason I will choose preamps and processors that create that effect. Of course sometimes you want cleaner pres but even then a little electric juice always makes the signal sound nicer.
A very convenient feature of the Aesthetix Calypso is the existence of a remote controlled "Phase" switch. Some audiophiles state that they are unable to distinguish when a recording is being played back in proper phase, but for those that are sensitive to it, the Calypso provides a valuable control which is not a feature of all that many pre-amps and certainly not many DAC's.
I discovered similar, Paul. I own a collection of passive preamps, some with switchable inputs. Then I decided to build (via a kit) an active preamp based on a Mark Levinson preamp mkll design. Though some components had to be sourced from Europe as well as the USA (including some recycled caps) to get it as right as possible. I didn’t expect anything to work let alone sound good. After a short warmup, I thought something was wrong as I could hear what seemed like ‘strange harmonics’ deep in familiar recordings. Then I realised my mistake. What I was hearing was greater resolution. I was hearing details in the upper mids and extreme highs that I’d never noticed before. Only three inputs, but that’s enough for most of my listening. It has no phono preamp so I connected (for vinyl use) a schiit mani phono preamp (don’t underestimate this little guy as it sounds very high end with cartridges up to £1000) And once again, everything seemed better. Only problem is (from an audiophile purest point of view) are we hearing added character or the truth? Being able to test things in a studio environment, I can say it’s a little of both. In the studio, various preamps are used from the mic’s to the 24bit digital desk which uses class A preamps with a huge 130dB of dynamics. It will also have a combo of hardware/software plugins adding EQ and various Effects (in moderation) Very few recordings are ‘true’ audiophile inspired, sadly.
My Schiit Saga preamp added a tremendous amount to my system. Also, for multi-amp configuration, having the two sets of pre-outs seems a lot better than trying to Y-off my outputs from my DAC.
cableaddict Yeah, it sounds better because it's coloring the sound in a pleasant way. It's not allowing you to hear greater detail, it's bringing out harmonics because it's saturating the signal. Distortion can be great, but it's altering the sound, not somehow adding clarity.
My DAC doesn't offer up enough grunt to get the power amp to a decent volume. So I have to use a preamp. I picked up a tube unit and it's just glorious.
Must not be the PS Audio DAC! Best one, for example, has a low, and a high output. Use XLR Connectors, where ever you can - 6 dB higher signal transmission, vs. RCA's; Example: CD Transport, ISR connector into D to A, then, XLR Connectors into Preamp, OR straight into a powerful Power Amp. The D to A, `has a preamp output, sort of output,' this is why you MAY be able to do without the preamp. {How efficient are your speakers? I have Klipsch, very efficient, can make a difference!} If you like your Preamp, great! For many years, the Mantra has been: a preamp, an amp, should be a, ` straight wire with gain.' Then, refer to Michael Fremer: "EVERYTHING DISTORTS!" The best thing to do, is to listen to as many good systems, combinations, as YOU can & reasonably afford, to find out for yourself, what sounds best to you! I'll have to try their BHK Preamp, sometime; now, I don't understand how even a fine piece of gear, can make an already excellent signal, sound, "Better!" To find out for myself, I suppose that I'll have to follow my own advice, & try it!
My A&H v6 valve preamp is everything to my sound, great analysis and turnaround story! I wonder if this extends to their use within amps themselves. I know in the olden days you would have PA systems with all valve amps, preamps, i can only imagine
If synergy is the goal I've successfully experimented with different combinations. My current best of is an Audio Research LS10 SE into my Luxman M900u. It's a fully balanced system from ARC CD player CD9 ref to speakers. The cd player is tube output, and all solid state preamp/poweramp have delivered the results that Paul speaks of, just gorgeous punch and soundstage from 2x 12" woofers to horn mids enhanced by super tweeters. It's a dream system. Synergy. Experiment. Listen and enjoy.
Generally, I also think that less is more in the case of preamps and equalizers. But I have a tube mono hi-fi preamp/AM-FM tuner I use when I want to listen to mono CDs or vinyl records. I use this preamp connected to my solid state stereo system. Audio is warmer in general and blues, jazz and other mono recordings sound better. For vinyl records, I use a Cambridge phono preamp connected to this preamp using an RCA Y-cable. Since, I'm adding a stage, it should cause Dynamic Range to be lower, but what I get is better audio overall. This preamp has the usual bass and treble controls and also four loundness settings as well. By the way, I haven't yet connected it to the mono tube power amp of the same brand and manufacturing year. It has four loudness settings as well.
I've done the audiophile-unthinkable... and it sounds better. 🙂 I have electrostatic hybrids and an integrated amplifier. I was very happy with the sound but the amp has very "soft" tone controls, and where I listen at modest levels it needed a fair boost in the low end and more "air" in the high end. The other issue was, despite glorious detail, there was next to no front to back imaging. In my studio I had a small mixer - the type a band might use. It has nice preamps built in and EQ knobs at 100hz, 2500, and 10,000. Very clean... very musical. I ran my CD player into the mixer then into the amp. I've added 3 db bass and treble and 1.5 at 2500. The impact in sound quality is amazing, especially when listening at 75-85db levels. Bigger, warmer low end, nice air and high end detail and improved clarity in the vocal range. ( I set the amp to bypass it's own tone controls) And I'd swear the front to back imaging has improved. I've always subscribed to the straight path concept but I'm thinking that "clean" isn't the end all / be all. When you think about it, a mastered song is a finished song with more tone and compression effects put in between the band and the listener. Technically there's a contamination of purity but that doesn't change the fact that a mastered track is much more pleasing to the ear. That's how I'm thinking of my setup. The system is being mastered AKA tailored to my room and listening levels. It is clearly a more enjoyable listening experience. I'd suggest others try this in the same situation. Very good, small mixers can be purchased for under $200. Just make sure it's an UNpowered mixer and you use the volume output responsibly. Thanks
Cheers Paul. I'm a pure digital user now and feed my Auralic G1 directly into a Naim 250DR power amp, but I'm tempted to try some Pre amps. You've just answered my question - I need to try it, but I'm not taken with Tubes, mainly due to how quickly they degrade. I'm not a rich man and cannot buy something that will need lots more attention throughout its life which is what tubes do..... 10000 hours maybe in a pre amp, but in my house that means changing them every 4 or so years and that's an absolute no go. It will limit the sales of your preamp too....
In my humble opinion that answer is on the money. What Paul did not explain is why that is so. I certainly don't know why. What I do know is that without a decent preamp there is kind of sterility in the sound. Could it be that the amplification has to be done in stages? Imagine being given a postage stamp and being asked to paint that as a fresco on the side of a building. Surely you would make an intermediate stage - say an A4 or A3 size sketch / painting / photo first and then work from that? (The ramblings of a property lawyer).
You might like the added bloom a tube pre-amplifier adds and if so go for it, but it's really a nice form of distortion and that's the answer you were looking for. Is it accurate? Can you call it hi-fi? Hell no. But why complain if it sounds nice to you?
I inserted a Schitt Valhalla tube preamp into my otherwise solid state signal chain and the difference is night and day. Not sure if it is the preamp or the fact that it is a TUBE preamp, but it is one of the biggest bangs for the buck that I've gotten in upgrading my sound system. I will not run my system without a preamp now because I would view it as a waste of good listening time.
I think of a preamp as a control and buffer stage. If you have multiple sources and they have varying output levels you need something that can handle the switching and amplification requirements. Also some sources have high impedance outputs that are not suited to cable capacitance that you see if you have the power amp at any distance from your sources. I've had a Conrad Johnson PV-10a in my system for close to 20 years now. My sources are a turntable, cd player, tuner and a DAC that is fed by my iMac with a toslink cable. The preamp feeds a musical concepts modified Haffler d220 amp. With the exception of the Shiit DAC this is an old system but it's capable of very good sound with good source material. I repair all my equipment myself and the circuitry of the preamp is stunningly simple, a single triode stage for the line level and another for the phono section. The components used are all very good, I've changed the tubes 3 or 4 times since I bought it used. I used to repair tektrpnix qscilloscopes so I know properly designed tube equipment is very long lived
Correct! The volume attenuator combined with all the cables and connections is a complexe load for the (in most cases unkknown) output buffer amp of the source. In most cases, it even affects the -in most cases given- feedback loop of the output buffer amp of the source. If passive preamp, you have a unbuffered, high- or uncertain-impedance signal, feeding your cables and your poweramp-input after leaving the volume attenuator. And at every single volume level you have an different behavior because of different complexe impedances. So, every footprint of cable, connector or attenuator is left in the signal.
so what 3 preamps in $800 to $1200 should I look at. I cant find many comparisons of preamps. Have 1850 Ati amp, 180 watts per channel, 5 channels driven from 2003. My ead (enlightened audio design) 2001preamp had dacs to help what I heard but now seems faulty, it lately only runs the 2 front channels. My equipment was bought used in 2001 on audiogon, so I spent much less than the selling price of the ead/ati combo. But cant find good evaluations for a resonably priced, but good quality preamp
I've found that a premium preamp can transform a lower quality amp into something more wonderful than a premium amp alone. The same preamp with a quality amp makes a marginal difference that starts to minimize the cost/ reward investment... at least with the equipment I've gotten my hands on.
I bought a used Adcom preamplifier tuner for about 250.00 and this thing is a Trainwreck. Channels going out and not working. Suddenly it will work for awhile and go out again. The technician said that there's a intermittent problem with old Adcom stuff and there's nothing more he can do to fix it. But the Adcom power amplifier I bought with it works like a charm.
It could be fun to see if some deliberate "destructive" DSP in a completely digital chain would give similar results if it was done to closely emulate the shortcomings of tubes.
The answer is definitely yes! Today ,we back to the vinyle support and most audiophile have not any experience we gain during the golden age from the seventies to the eighties...it was the period of the analogue audio... At the first stage, the stereo monitoring of the recording involving the respect of the phasing in acoustic was allowing to highlight the sensivity of and treatment of the analogic source without any strong signal compression as we do today! We lost both culture and know how as well! The preamp according to Lew Johnson (CJ) is the most difficult element to achieve audio electronic componant... As a result a good preamp unit is bringing music space, soundstage, respect of the dynamic and the rythm to be as well as matters.. As measure we developp numeric technology only fews companies have been involved by the preamp unit interest.... So the listening session in the seventies and heighties of the preamp competition between audio research,Conrad johnson, Mark Levinson have shown the sound difference between these units... The situation was similar for the turntable! The feed back experience is poor today,Thank you Paul to remind us the reality... Raymond (from from Blois France)
Sorry but no.. the AMP is more important than the preamp.. and spending heavily i'snt always necessary or even wise (see my post above where I go into detail about that very topic) if any single component deserves more $ per se hands down it is the actual speakers.
So, what you're saying is that a preamplifier that perhaps slightly colours the sound might improve the way a system sounds. I must say that I agree. Graphic equalisers are an excellent example of that, but only if correctly implemented.
Very very valuable advice. Thanks for this very precious video. I would like to add that digital sources exacerbate the issue of preamps and tubes in particular. LPs can sound quite good also with a complete solid state system. Instead with digital sources tubes provide that sense of space that fully solid state rigs have difficulties in providing. I have a feeling. It depends on how the solid state units are designed. But i am not an expert at all. Thanks again and best regards, gino
One reason a pre-amp/power amp system should be better is that they are run on separate power supplies. A typical integrated amp operates both from a single supply. The large currents used for the power amp can bleed into the pre-amp signals and muddy the output. It probably will not be audible, but in principle it is possible. Some high end power amps use separate power supplies as well. Essentially two mono block amplifiers in one package. The old Marantz Model 15 was built this way.
Are you saying by adding a bit of tube sound (reverb micro phonics) from a preamp that has just the right blend of this distortion it will enhance the sound? Maybe you could add a knob to your preamp to "dial in" the amount of "enhancement". Call it the "E Factor" adjustment. It would go from dry sterile low distortion to smooth liquid rubber tube sound.
Buddhist Sympathizer Good analogy. Someone's music might be noise for others... Examples.. Trash, hardrock genres might be some sort of noise for classical music lovers.. ..
@@fredscofield180 It is a matter of what you are trying to achieve with your expensive audio system. I think there are to things you could want from a system: 1. Neutral and realtistic reproduction of the recording. Thus you dont want colorisation/harmonic distortion. 2. Emotional connecntion to the recording. Then you might want colorisation, because it suits your taste, thus you enjoy listening even more. (Tube amps etc.) The problem is that many "audiophiles" arent aware of this decision. They dont see that it doesnt make sense to spend thousands upen thousands of dollars for eg. a very neutral vinyl player, and to then buy a tube amp for using that turntable.
I wonder how much of the difference between preamps and between preamp/preamp-less can be attributed to level matching. I have definitely seen different results putting my CD player line outs through aux inputs of a vintage luxman receiver vs putting a pre-attenuated signal through. Turns out the input sensitivity was 150mV. Similarly, if using a separate power amp and either the Luxman or a Benchmark DAC1 PRE as preamp, the full level signal sounded better to me going through the Benchmark (which has higher max input level).
If you have a pre-amp you probably have several devices you listen to. The pickup devices from various sources have different amplification requirements and a switch on the Pre=amp can address this. If you have an inexpensive portable cassette player, the pre-amp is built into the amp, if it has a line in it has a Impedance check before and will automatically perform line mode overiding the tape head input when the Jack is used.. thats one type of preamp funtion. Just remember, more components is a chance for distortion
Very good answer Paul. Couldn’t agree with you more. Audiophiles have been taught to keep the single as simple and as clean as possible which would “in theory” mean no preamp in a digital system, but i agree digital sounds lifeless without a good preamp in the chain.
Is it possible that the system sounded better with the preamp because the DAC to amp directly had some impedance issues and slipping the preamp in essentially corrected this?
A well designed pre-amp will have a low output impedance to drive whatever load is presented to it by the cables to the power amp and the power amp itself. Source devices are not designed to have that "we can drive anything" capability. I see the three functions of a pre-amp as source selector, level matching and control, output driver and a good quality pre-amp does these things well without introducing distortion in the frequency and time domains which can rob the music of the finest textures.
I'm no vintage purist or anything. In my opinion, some older recordings can be pretty weak sounding and a more modern recording rig could have worked better for it. Their rigs produced a lot of noise and, for whatever reason, the tonal spectrum was way more limited. Having said that, there are clear instances where the massive colorization and non-clean signal greatly benefited older recordings. When I listen to surf rock or big band on Pandora and the playlist mixes vintage recordings with modern recordings, the vintage ones sound far, far, far better with few exceptions. And the modern recordings are certainly more crystal clear, less noise, etc. So once again, which is "better" is not a simple formula. Seriously, just think of a song like Box Tops "The Letter" or "Stairway to Heaven" or "Be My Baby." No matter how they recorded those songs, you wouldn't want to change a thing or touch one aspect to it. I feel the same way about many recordings from many eras using all sorts of techniques.
I went through the passive volume control vs. preamp. With analog, a preamp is VERY necessary. Even with a good pre, the interconnects make a BIG difference. What I believe to be happening, is with a signal voltage, a little loss in current results in voltage variation. the cure seems to be to trade current for voltage, or at least have the current maintain the voltage. I have an interconnect design that I filed for a patent on, and after much effort, gave up because a Vietnamese working for the fed said the paper work wasn't done "professionally". Why is that a problem? I finally gave up after about a year of working on the paper work. The pattern allowed a simple interconnect to function like a balanced system.
give advice on how to do this? (if it's not difficult) - there is no money for a good preamplifier, the sound from the DAC goes to a direct power amplifier with a volume control
I have watched several of your posts regarding audio, and you are obviously very knowledgeable. I have a Marantz 2230 I was using as a pre-amp to my NAD power amp, a CD player, and KEF speakers. This system sounded good, but after awhile decided to purchase a Pro-Ject turntable which requires a phono pre-amp, a Sonos Port for streaming, and still using the NAD C268 power amp. As a somewhat new convert to using separates (vs. the integrated, turntable, CD set-up I had prior) I am finding that understanding and learning how to connect each component can be confusing. Are there videos you (or others) do that show visually how (and why) connections between components look?
Thank you! i was just wondering if that would make a difference, im making a handmade Bluetooth speaker and i went for ever to find a good amp for it, so i came across a TDA7492 (It's a D class amplifier), this one has a NE5532 pre amp on it. For what i investigated the NE5532 it's from philips and it's used on motherboards for the audio card that is mounted on board, and sounds pretty nice i would say, (for something that comes with a computer), so this clarifies me a lot of things, thank you.
I like NAD preamps. I'd have one except that I live in an apartment and all the stereo I need is powered by a TubeCube 7, through a pair of Infinity 5 1/4" Kappa coaxials that I mounted in a custom made ported enclosure.
Hey Paul. I Love your channel! I know it’s all subjective and there is so many variables involved when it comes to picking out components. I’ve been putting my 2 channel system together for almost 20 years now. Based on budget I’ve taken my time to put it together. I have a Krell KSL preamp and Oppo. HA-1 dac ( not a big headphone listener although I have a pair of HiFiman headphones). I’m using an old Proceed amp 2 and Dali Grand Coupe speakers with a Marsntz 8004 and Music Hall mmf 7 with Jolida JD9. The funny thing is that my wiring which is all Siltech and Nordost is worth almost as much as the gear. My problem is that I hate the volume control on the Krell. It drives me crazy. It needs to be played loud in order to sound good. Also no remote or digital setting. Do you think if I sell off my Krell and Oppo, and purchase the Stellsr Gain Cell, it will work out for me? I have Tidal HiFi.
I don't know, but i love use preamp input to play my preamp tube or Handphone. Its has better sound and full range bass until the lowest bass in detail. Better tan use aux in to play my tube preamp or my handphone.
"if the pre-amp enhances (read as changing) the sounds" here is where you making your mistake. " Enhance" doesn't mean automatically change. When you take a dirty hazy, grease glass (think of sound) and you clean it so it's clean and it sparkles again it's the same glass it's just crystal clear.
I beg to differ. I've tried both and my experience says that a passive preamp produces a cleaner and purer sound than an active preamp. One of the reasons for that is bc the signal is not degraded and compromised by a host of circuit and components contained in the active preamp. Admittedly, I haven't listened to the best active preamp, but even so it does not detract from the fact that the signal suffers from some degradation and impurity.
Not necessarily. This is not a cut and dried situation. There are a lot of variables to consider like input to output impedance matching, source voltage/gain, etc. A good Class A preamp can be indistinguishable resolution-wise from a passive while creating a greater sense of space and texture, for instance. But it's all system dependent, not one size fits all.
Paul. Thank you for the info. I am starting my journey into the stereo and theater sound world. At this time most money is going elsewhere, like education and collecting guitars, so I find myself starting modestly with perhaps "non" audiophile products. For example, I am considering investing in an Emotiva Amp, preamp, DAC system. Curious how you (or anyone reading) would regard this company. My long term goal is to invest cash in McIntosh Audio Systems, they are really big around where I live. I don't have many places to choose from, and the ones that are around here stock themselves with McIntosh, NAD, Anthem and Parasound. Peace.
I prefer to have separates, need multiple source inputs, and absolutely want tone controls. That means I pretty much have to use a preamp. I think vintage Adcom preamps and power amps from the 80's and 90's offer some of the best bang for the buck on the hi-fi market. They're somewhere between tough and impossible to beat for the money.
I don't understand the question or the answer. Many integrated amp are in fact preamps married to a separate built in amp. Marantz is one of those companies that use that design, but there are others. Because I use a separate amp for my best speakers, I use the preamp section of my Marantz unit without using the amp.
Hi Paul it does a different job than an equalizer, what you just explained sounds like an equalizer, but I'm also thinking there's more if a preamp does that to music if you add an equalizer and a preamp what happens.
Yes a good preamp just sounds more real and yes a tube preamp is much more likely to give you that big open soundstage and more holographic /room filling sound.I have heard that time and again with Supratek preamps for example.I remember hearing one of them inserted into a very good system using Magico speakers and Audio Flight Strumento pre and power amps and the difference it made was huge-from sounding good to sounding wonderful.And the Supratek was about a third the price of the Audio Flight SS preamp.
I have a preamp for my turntable simply because the phono in put in my receiver was decidedly inferior in terms of sound and output. I was about to get a new turntable, which may or may not have improved things but would not really solve the cause of the problem. So even though some components "take" a turntable, (phono) it is will not save you having to use one of your rca jacks if you end up having to get good sound out of your turntable (unless your turntable has a good built in preamp).
Bottom line short answer - NO; the only reason for passing an audio signal through an additional pre-amp is to either 1) raise the level 2) provide an alteration to frequency response e.g. RIAA compensation. 3) altering impedance e.g. emitter or cathode follower
Another fun and informative vid. Thanks Paul. ...A bit of a ridiculous title for this video. .. Of course my preamp matters to the over overall sound of my audio system.
That confirms it, buying one next week. I do however have a question I will be using an RCA mixer in the main channel along with the RCA going to the back of the stereo The stereo has an aux cable at the front and was having issues with a Bluetooth audio transmitter, can't quite describe the sound but it was nothing like plugging an aux cable in Worst case I could use an audio device switch. But that might impact the sound quality
If all your audio amplification is done by solid state transistorized or integrated circuitry; you need a tube preamp in the frontend! That is all it takes to make your system sound absolutely wonderful! That 2nd harmonic is the key. She sounds beautiful.
I fell on this subject because I was thinking..how could I bring my Akai 4000 DS preamp up to a higher snuff. There's got to be something out there, swappable even, but I'm not finding it. Shoot, I could add a BT communication add on too.
Now the real question for me is, what would be the best low end preamp that could go into a scarlett 2i2 3rd generation, into MacBook into garage band that would make the recording more homogeneous and professional sounding.
I think you need to check the specs the specs. Some offer more connection without dropping the voltage, some in addition increase the line voltage and some have more frequency separation and is more dynamic. There is a reason why music from a phone 3.5 mm sometimes sound better even though the voltage is lower but it is more dynamic than some pre out from head unit so a high quality pre amp will help with frequency separation and being more dynamic. Lastly not selling any product here but last year db drive and company like focal makes some loudspeaker component system which help prevent the loud speaker beaming and distorted with high frequency. People believe if they put a mid range speaker and tweeter with a cap or crossover on a full range signal wire that the mid range won't get any high frequency signal that is false. This one of the main reason mid range speaker sounds terrible at high volume because when the midrange get high frequency causing it distort and start to beam.
Apparently many modern receivers don't have the best phono stages, so buying an external one of a minimum quality seems to provide a positive experience.
If you go for vinyl get a good RIIA pre-amp. If all your music is digital go for a good DAC. I have a Rega DAC before the signal goes into my NAD C272, and from there to my JBL LT 100. No pre-amp is needed, lots of power, and good sound. :)
I was just here to learn about amps but... I recognize those mountains... and that bridge!.. Actually I think my dad worked in one of those buildings to the right! Small fricking world.
I plugged my Cambridge audio CXV v2 straight into the Emotiva A150 power amp and used the digital preamp feature of the CXN, it sounded thin and sterile. I used my Yamaha DSP A1 as a preamp and it was much better. Playing the CXN into my Sansui G7000 receiver was much better
Hi, Using the digital preamp feature of my CXNV2 gave me the opportunity to get a remote volume control ( with streammagic app) for my vintage gear. connected as a source in my Sansui Eight,, CXNV2 was fine, but pluggin in the Main Amp direct input of the EIGHT is much better in terms of sound ( space, less sibilance)...no dull at all, but maybe the preamp section needs a revision ( that i did on the driver/power amp amp)
Every additional component added to any signal chain will alter the signal away from the original. This may be desirable, but there will always be some undesired alteration. This includes all-in-one receivers. Just because the components share a box and power supply does not mean they do not introduce undesirable alterations. Even if you keep the signal digital, each subsequent processing will introduce undesired alterations along with the desired ones. If there are no desired alterations, then there's no use for the component/processing plug in. And, of course, you cannot separate the desired from the undesired alterations - you have to take the good with the bad. Another argument I have is - most people use a computer or laptop to manage their digital sources. But have you looked at the specs of those analog outputs? They're terrible. So you feed the digital information to a separate DAC.... isn't that now your preamp? And even if your amp takes the digital information - it still has a DAC separate from the amplification. It's still no different than the all-in-one receiver... having a DAC in the same box as the Amp does not integrate the two into one component. Part of the problem I've found with all digital processing is that audio software processing is either crap, or super expensive. For instance - there's lots of crappy digital equalization programs out there, but a dynamic range enhancer is very rare and expensive. Most surround sound processing requires the source to be encoded. Which means they do nothing for the legacy music collection I've built up over the last 30 years. Analog surround sound processors that do not require encoding are expensive and often have low S:N ratios, digital processing programs that don't require encoded sources are expensive, rare, and often don't do the job as well as their analog counterpart. I would love to find a 64 bit computer app version of the Yamaha DSP-1 and the DBX 4bx. Add in a good digital eq. app, and your digital system will be worthy of any DAC/Amp/speaker combo. The only thing missing, is that the DSP-1 does not use a center channel. But that's a relatively minor software mod these days. Most music media shouldn't be using the center channel much anyway - as it's mainly for movies and video.
![If you can't hear this then you're not an audiophile [See description for link to followup video]](/img/n.gif)
I really love the topics and explanations that you talk about. As someone that's try to learn about hifis and how all the bits fit together these videos have been really helpful.
This guy is a national treasure... 👍
This guy is a national scammer... 👍
@@pepeonzima2444 Why?
What is wrong in your mind that motivates you to make such a slanderous comment? What are your credentials Pepe? Could you please link us to your audio videos?
PS Audio equipment is in monetary value range where one could question the price to value... and they are making that 1000$ power cable.
Just shading some light on to why one could make such comment, as PS Audio does dabble into more 'questionable' audiophile power technology... along with their no doubt quality audio hardware.
I used a highly regarded passive preamp for several years, then borrowed a BAT preamp from a dealer. The sound improvement was so great, I bought it. When I went to a separate DAC (Benchmark) which had a headphone amp, I tried using it direct to the power amps, but the stereo image shrank to half size, so I put the preamp back.
Totally agree on the need for a good pre-amp. Back in the late 80s/early 90s, there was a push for passive preamps. I came close to building one until I heard one demo'd at CES. It sounded dull... A good pre-amp provides a vital gain stage to the signal, especially in analogue.
I like tube preamps mixed with solid state power amplifiers. When you have tubes in both power amp and preamp the sound becomes too pillowy for my taste.
Never heard "pillowy" before. But as a New tubes fan, I understand. All tubes for Me.
I prefer solid state preamp and tube amp. Keeping the signal at lower distortion before it reaches the tube amp. Also always have a solid state source for these reasons. Of course I've gotten good results the other way around too. But I will always have a solid state phono preamp and DA converter.
Every single time I have a question about audio, I Google it, and end up watching one of your videos. Thank you for what you do for us audiophiles! In this case, I had answered my own question and just wanted to make sure I wasn't crazy. My story: For several years I had been using a Universal Disc Player, which has a digital preamp, as a source in my A/V system, and running it straight into a power amp. It sounded ok, but truly lacked pizazz. A few days ago I decided to put an old headphone amp (from another system) between the two, and the results were absolutely astonishing. It was actually just dumb luck; the headphone amp I am now using as a preamp is Class A, balanced, with XLR inputs and outputs. So yes, preamps can make a HUGE difference. But as everybody knows, it all depends . . . .
I have heard sound systems that made me feel like I was In the studio. I agree with anything that brings that experience closer to my audience. (Ray Charles)
I prefer tone controls to enhance cymbal sounds and string tone. So treb and bass are needed.
Then your system is not linear needing a boost at certain frequencies.
Good point. Simply.. personal taste
Besides convenience and amplification, a preamp often solves impedance related issues , like capacitor coupled connections with high output impedance and low input impedance resulting in poor frequency response.
I personally think a good quality pre does more to improve the sound than the power amp. Yes, you have to have a power amp that will drive the load, w/o clipping, but that being a given, the pre is king.
From a reggae sound system perspective, the pre amp makes the sound!
Supercar Dave 🇯🇲 facts
broo thank you! I make reggae music and this is everything I needed to hear! Do you recommend any pre amps for reggae??
What preamp did the Original Reggae artist use. And do you make real reggae or that foreign main stream studio mess.
I have a pioneer set to 3/4 volume going into a eq then a line driver. The output from the line driver enables me to have the gain down all the way on my amp which also helps my amp work less and have wetter bass = sound quality skyrockets. For only 600wrms on 1 ct sounds 18 she gets down. even if you have a aftermarket head unit (a preamp/line driver is a must in my opinion)
I have found the same thing. I even owned some older PS Audio preamps with the "straight line" option (5.5, 6.0), and preferred it with the line stage engaged. I'm pretty sure that it all comes down to impedance matching, and the inability of the source component's line output to drive some cables and power amp inputs effectively, especially when buffered by the passive volume pot. Impedance matching is one of those topics that too often gets ignored in high end audio.
Another gotham here
yes they do and expensive it is especially when recording along with mics and convertors, all in one unit the prism lyra
I was using an integrated amp as a pre for years. It worked on standby, so I don't think it was doing anything other than connecting two signals through a volume control. Didn't detect a difference pre-less. Recently replace that with a dedicated pre and wow. Tighter and better controlled bass, more detail and dynamics and the instruments have more attack. Some signal gain too it seems.
NOW you are on the RIGHT track!
Pretty general question. Answer is yes and no, depending on the preamp. My preamp is a homebrew 76 triode tube with a 6688 tube as a current source. I keep it's volume at 10 and use the Kimmel Mu Stage fed 6550 amps volume control. It sounds harmonically rich and ever so dynamic with digital sources. For cassette and vinyl I use the preamps volume control. Loves me some 2nd order harmonic harmonics at over 100 dB. Only for short sessions though. Then the volume goes back to 80dB or so.
I agree with him. A really good preamp is a game changer. I have a AVA hifi preamp and it is tube. The sound off it is wonderful
Before even watching the video, YES.
I just ran 2A3 mono blocks with their own volume knobs.
Very short signal path.
I then tried them with a Sonic Frontiers SPL-2 as good a preamp as has ever been made.
The dynamics were better, and the sound stage was bigger.
Trust your ears , sometimes the short path logic is proven wrong.
You should probably distinguish between the pre-amplification necessary for bringing up the signal level of a phono cartridge from a piece of a volt to signal level equivalent to the output of a CD player or other device, and on the other hand, simple attenuation/adjustment of the signal level of a CD player. The phono input is subjected to whatever the quality of that pre-amplification circuit, whereas the CD input is not. Having said that, the preamp, or what I like to call the control device, may or may not have an audible effect on sound quality for those devices whose input is already at signal level and is simple selected for and sent on to the amplifier. I would love to hear your comments on this.
Speaker Builder i have a very cheap preamp and a 30 k amp it sounds so good
Speaker Builder I
I agree, and microphone preamp. In many scenarios the preamp is what defines the sound not the amplifier.
Actually, they do. They give the sound body. The reason is the balance between voltage and current. They depend on each other. Voltage is the signal. Current provided by a preamp stops the voltage varying, especially if you were using a resistive ladder network.
Sylvester, You are missing the fact that, if you´re not using a preamp you are most probably using a DAC attenuating the signal. DACs do a lot of math while doing this, and no matter how good the DAC is, doing this kind of math will alter the signal as well. I have a DCS Scarlatti and a Griphon Pandora Preamp, I've played with this stuff and I must say; I preferred the sound of the system better with the Preamp hands down !
@@crventura The Griphon Pandora Preamp is $46,000! and I bet at that price range you've been ripped off completely in audible blind tests that you refused to endure for less pricey preamps you could have purcahsed.
Hi Razer, that is definitely a no problem I have plenty to spare. I buy my audio gear under a cost no object principle. So, don’t feel sorry for me, there’s no need.
Cheers from Portugal
I have a Rotel RB-980 BX power amp and an old Hafler pre-amp. I switched my pre-amp out with an Adcom GFP-1 and WOW! What a difference! My Monitor Audio Silver 300's came to life!
So, yes, in my case a better pre-amp SURE enhanced the sound.
With what source though?
I respect such elegant explanations. I always wondered why can't I feed a power amp directly through DAC, which never sounded better than with a high-end preamp. Thanks.
You’ll be happy to know your good at these shows .thank you for the knowledge
Saturation and harmonics are what my ears love. For that reason I will choose preamps and processors that create that effect. Of course sometimes you want cleaner pres but even then a little electric juice always makes the signal sound nicer.
i love my preamp, the onkyo p304. i always thought it simply directed signal. thanks for sharing the knowledge
A very convenient feature of the Aesthetix Calypso is the existence of a remote controlled "Phase" switch. Some audiophiles state that they are unable to distinguish when a recording is being played back in proper phase, but for those that are sensitive to it, the Calypso provides a valuable control which is not a feature of all that many pre-amps and certainly not many DAC's.
I discovered similar, Paul. I own a collection of passive preamps, some with switchable inputs. Then I decided to build (via a kit) an active preamp based on a Mark Levinson preamp mkll design. Though some components had to be sourced from Europe as well as the USA (including some recycled caps) to get it as right as possible.
I didn’t expect anything to work let alone sound good. After a short warmup, I thought something was wrong as I could hear what seemed like ‘strange harmonics’ deep in familiar recordings. Then I realised my mistake. What I was hearing was greater resolution. I was hearing details in the upper mids and extreme highs that I’d never noticed before.
Only three inputs, but that’s enough for most of my listening.
It has no phono preamp so I connected (for vinyl use) a schiit mani phono preamp (don’t underestimate this little guy as it sounds very high end with cartridges up to £1000)
And once again, everything seemed better. Only problem is (from an audiophile purest point of view) are we hearing added character or the truth?
Being able to test things in a studio environment, I can say it’s a little of both.
In the studio, various preamps are used from the mic’s to the 24bit digital desk which uses class A preamps with a huge 130dB of dynamics. It will also have a combo of hardware/software plugins adding EQ and various Effects (in moderation)
Very few recordings are ‘true’ audiophile inspired, sadly.
Excellent. We want you to hear every pin drop. Like you were there.
My Schiit Saga preamp added a tremendous amount to my system. Also, for multi-amp configuration, having the two sets of pre-outs seems a lot better than trying to Y-off my outputs from my DAC.
cableaddict Yeah, it sounds better because it's coloring the sound in a pleasant way. It's not allowing you to hear greater detail, it's bringing out harmonics because it's saturating the signal. Distortion can be great, but it's altering the sound, not somehow adding clarity.
My DAC doesn't offer up enough grunt to get the power amp to a decent volume. So I have to use a preamp. I picked up a tube unit and it's just glorious.
Must not be the PS Audio DAC! Best one, for example, has a low, and a high output. Use XLR Connectors, where ever you can - 6 dB higher signal transmission, vs. RCA's; Example: CD Transport, ISR connector into D to A, then, XLR Connectors into Preamp, OR straight into a powerful Power Amp. The D to A, `has a preamp output, sort of output,' this is why you MAY be able to do without the preamp. {How efficient are your speakers? I have Klipsch, very efficient, can make a difference!} If you like your Preamp, great! For many years, the Mantra has been: a preamp, an amp, should be a, ` straight wire with gain.' Then, refer to Michael Fremer: "EVERYTHING DISTORTS!" The best thing to do, is to listen to as many good systems, combinations, as YOU can & reasonably afford, to find out for yourself, what sounds best to you! I'll have to try their BHK Preamp, sometime; now, I don't understand how even a fine piece of gear, can make an already excellent signal, sound, "Better!" To find out for myself, I suppose that I'll have to follow my own advice, & try it!
@@rickhigginson8546 to be honest, I wouldn't touch PS Audio garbage with a ten foot pole
20 year ago I selling and set up PS audio's Amplifier, And now we learn more about it from the founder !
My A&H v6 valve preamp is everything to my sound, great analysis and turnaround story!
I wonder if this extends to their use within amps themselves. I know in the olden days you would have PA systems with all valve amps, preamps, i can only imagine
If synergy is the goal I've successfully experimented with different combinations. My current best of is an Audio Research LS10 SE into my Luxman M900u. It's a fully balanced system from ARC CD player CD9 ref to speakers. The cd player is tube output, and all solid state preamp/poweramp have delivered the results that Paul speaks of, just gorgeous punch and soundstage from 2x 12" woofers to horn mids enhanced by super tweeters. It's a dream system. Synergy. Experiment. Listen and enjoy.
Generally, I also think that less is more in the case of preamps and equalizers. But I have a tube mono hi-fi preamp/AM-FM tuner I use when I want to listen to mono CDs or vinyl records. I use this preamp connected to my solid state stereo system. Audio is warmer in general and blues, jazz and other mono recordings sound better. For vinyl records, I use a Cambridge phono preamp connected to this preamp using an RCA Y-cable. Since, I'm adding a stage, it should cause Dynamic Range to be lower, but what I get is better audio overall. This preamp has the usual bass and treble controls and also four loundness settings as well. By the way, I haven't yet connected it to the mono tube power amp of the same brand and manufacturing year. It has four loudness settings as well.
I've done the audiophile-unthinkable... and it sounds better. 🙂
I have electrostatic hybrids and an integrated amplifier. I was very happy with the sound but the amp has very "soft" tone controls, and where I listen at modest levels it needed a fair boost in the low end and more "air" in the high end. The other issue was, despite glorious detail, there was next to no front to back imaging.
In my studio I had a small mixer - the type a band might use. It has nice preamps built in and EQ knobs at 100hz, 2500, and 10,000. Very clean... very musical.
I ran my CD player into the mixer then into the amp. I've added 3 db bass and treble and 1.5 at 2500. The impact in sound quality is amazing, especially when listening at 75-85db levels. Bigger, warmer low end, nice air and high end detail and improved clarity in the vocal range. ( I set the amp to bypass it's own tone controls) And I'd swear the front to back imaging has improved.
I've always subscribed to the straight path concept but I'm thinking that "clean" isn't the end all / be all. When you think about it, a mastered song is a finished song with more tone and compression effects put in between the band and the listener. Technically there's a contamination of purity but that doesn't change the fact that a mastered track is much more pleasing to the ear.
That's how I'm thinking of my setup. The system is being mastered AKA tailored to my room and listening levels. It is clearly a more enjoyable listening experience. I'd suggest others try this in the same situation. Very good, small mixers can be purchased for under $200. Just make sure it's an UNpowered mixer and you use the volume output responsibly.
Thanks
Cheers Paul. I'm a pure digital user now and feed my Auralic G1 directly into a Naim 250DR power amp, but I'm tempted to try some Pre amps. You've just answered my question - I need to try it, but I'm not taken with Tubes, mainly due to how quickly they degrade. I'm not a rich man and cannot buy something that will need lots more attention throughout its life which is what tubes do..... 10000 hours maybe in a pre amp, but in my house that means changing them every 4 or so years and that's an absolute no go. It will limit the sales of your preamp too....
In my humble opinion that answer is on the money. What Paul did not explain is why that is so. I certainly don't know why. What I do know is that without a decent preamp there is kind of sterility in the sound. Could it be that the amplification has to be done in stages? Imagine being given a postage stamp and being asked to paint that as a fresco on the side of a building. Surely you would make an intermediate stage - say an A4 or A3 size sketch / painting / photo first and then work from that? (The ramblings of a property lawyer).
You might like the added bloom a tube pre-amplifier adds and if so go for it, but it's really a nice form of distortion and that's the answer you were looking for. Is it accurate? Can you call it hi-fi? Hell no. But why complain if it sounds nice to you?
I inserted a Schitt Valhalla tube preamp into my otherwise solid state signal chain and the difference is night and day. Not sure if it is the preamp or the fact that it is a TUBE preamp, but it is one of the biggest bangs for the buck that I've gotten in upgrading my sound system. I will not run my system without a preamp now because I would view it as a waste of good listening time.
I think of a preamp as a control and buffer stage. If you have multiple sources and they have varying output levels you need something that can handle the switching and amplification requirements. Also some sources have high impedance outputs that are not suited to cable capacitance that you see if you have the power amp at any distance from your sources.
I've had a Conrad Johnson PV-10a in my system for close to 20 years now. My sources are a turntable, cd player, tuner and a DAC that is fed by my iMac with a toslink cable. The preamp feeds a musical concepts modified Haffler d220 amp. With the exception of the Shiit DAC this is an old system but it's capable of very good sound with good source material.
I repair all my equipment myself and the circuitry of the preamp is stunningly simple, a single triode stage for the line level and another for the phono section. The components used are all very good, I've changed the tubes 3 or 4 times since I bought it used. I used to repair tektrpnix qscilloscopes so I know properly designed tube equipment is very long lived
Wow that explanation seals the deal Mr. Paul always explains it better, thanks
Hi Paul. Many good quality preamplifiers have burr brown dac incorporated in the circuitry.
Correct! The volume attenuator combined with all the cables and connections is a complexe load for the (in most cases unkknown) output buffer amp of the source. In most cases, it even affects the -in most cases given- feedback loop of the output buffer amp of the source. If passive preamp, you have a unbuffered, high- or uncertain-impedance signal, feeding your cables and your poweramp-input after leaving the volume attenuator. And at every single volume level you have an different behavior because of different complexe impedances. So, every footprint of cable, connector or attenuator is left in the signal.
so what 3 preamps in $800 to $1200 should I look at. I cant find many comparisons of preamps. Have 1850 Ati amp, 180 watts per channel, 5 channels driven from 2003. My ead (enlightened audio design) 2001preamp had dacs to help what I heard but now seems faulty, it lately only runs the 2 front channels. My equipment was bought used in 2001 on audiogon, so I spent much less than the selling price of the ead/ati combo. But cant find good evaluations for a resonably priced, but good quality preamp
I've found that a premium preamp can transform a lower quality amp into something more wonderful than a premium amp alone. The same preamp with a quality amp makes a marginal difference that starts to minimize the cost/ reward investment... at least with the equipment I've gotten my hands on.
I bought a used Adcom preamplifier tuner for about 250.00 and this thing is a Trainwreck. Channels going out and not working. Suddenly it will work for awhile and go out again. The technician said that there's a intermittent problem with old Adcom stuff and there's nothing more he can do to fix it. But the Adcom power amplifier I bought with it works like a charm.
It could be fun to see if some deliberate "destructive" DSP in a completely digital chain would give similar results if it was done to closely emulate the shortcomings of tubes.
Of course you could emulate the colorisation generated by a preamp with a DSP. You just measure the distortion a reproduce it with the DSP.
The answer is definitely yes!
Today ,we back to the vinyle support and most audiophile have not any experience we gain during the golden age from the seventies to the eighties...it was the period of the analogue audio...
At the first stage, the stereo monitoring of the recording involving the respect of the phasing in acoustic was allowing to highlight the sensivity of and treatment of the analogic source without any strong signal compression as we do today!
We lost both culture and know how as well!
The preamp according to Lew Johnson (CJ) is the most difficult element to achieve audio electronic componant...
As a result a good preamp unit is bringing music space, soundstage, respect of the dynamic and the rythm to be as well as matters..
As measure we developp numeric technology only fews companies have been involved by the preamp unit interest....
So the listening session in the seventies and heighties of the preamp competition between audio research,Conrad johnson, Mark Levinson have shown the sound difference between these units...
The situation was similar for the turntable!
The feed back experience is poor today,Thank you Paul to remind us the reality...
Raymond (from from Blois France)
Without getting technical about it, a preamp is the 2nd most important component in a system after speakers. Spend heavily, you won’t regret it.
Sorry but no.. the AMP is more important than the preamp.. and spending heavily i'snt always necessary or even wise (see my post above where I go into detail about that very topic)
if any single component deserves more $ per se hands down it is the actual speakers.
So, what you're saying is that a preamplifier that perhaps slightly colours the sound might improve the way a system sounds.
I must say that I agree.
Graphic equalisers are an excellent example of that, but only if correctly implemented.
Very very valuable advice. Thanks for this very precious video. I would like to add that digital sources exacerbate the issue of preamps and tubes in particular. LPs can sound quite good also with a complete solid state system. Instead with digital sources tubes provide that sense of space that fully solid state rigs have difficulties in providing. I have a feeling. It depends on how the solid state units are designed. But i am not an expert at all. Thanks again and best regards, gino
my pure tube McIntosh C1100 has turned my already amazing system into a most amazing system! I can't see listening without it,.
video I made of the pre-amp in action: ua-cam.com/video/MH5YAbCfDJ8/v-deo.html
One reason a pre-amp/power amp system should be better is that they are run on separate power supplies. A typical integrated amp operates both from a single supply. The large currents used for the power amp can bleed into the pre-amp signals and muddy the output. It probably will not be audible, but in principle it is possible. Some high end power amps use separate power supplies as well. Essentially two mono block amplifiers in one package. The old Marantz Model 15 was built this way.
But why technically? What is the mechanism at work?
Are you saying by adding a bit of tube sound (reverb micro phonics) from a preamp
that has just the right blend of this distortion it will enhance the sound? Maybe you
could add a knob to your preamp to "dial in" the amount of "enhancement". Call it the
"E Factor" adjustment. It would go from dry sterile low distortion to smooth liquid
rubber tube sound.
Keyword: Colorization.
One person's Colorization is another person's Distortion
Buddhist Sympathizer
Good analogy.
Someone's music might be noise for others...
Examples.. Trash, hardrock genres might be some sort of noise for classical music lovers.. ..
Preamps are very useful.
Keywords, Total Harmonic Distortion.
The thing the industry spent billions over the years trying to get rid of.
@@fredscofield180 It is a matter of what you are trying to achieve with your expensive audio system. I think there are to things you could want from a system:
1. Neutral and realtistic reproduction of the recording. Thus you dont want colorisation/harmonic distortion.
2. Emotional connecntion to the recording. Then you might want colorisation, because it suits your taste, thus you enjoy listening even more. (Tube amps etc.)
The problem is that many "audiophiles" arent aware of this decision. They dont see that it doesnt make sense to spend thousands upen thousands of dollars for eg. a very neutral vinyl player, and to then buy a tube amp for using that turntable.
I wonder how much of the difference between preamps and between preamp/preamp-less can be attributed to level matching. I have definitely seen different results putting my CD player line outs through aux inputs of a vintage luxman receiver vs putting a pre-attenuated signal through. Turns out the input sensitivity was 150mV. Similarly, if using a separate power amp and either the Luxman or a Benchmark DAC1 PRE as preamp, the full level signal sounded better to me going through the Benchmark (which has higher max input level).
If you have a pre-amp you probably have several devices you listen to. The pickup devices from various sources have different amplification requirements and a switch on the Pre=amp can address this. If you have an inexpensive portable cassette player, the pre-amp is built into the amp, if it has a line in it has a Impedance check before and will automatically perform line mode overiding the tape head input when the Jack is used.. thats one type of preamp funtion. Just remember, more components is a chance for distortion
Very good answer Paul. Couldn’t agree with you more. Audiophiles have been taught to keep the single as simple and as clean as possible which would “in theory” mean no preamp in a digital system, but i agree digital sounds lifeless without a good preamp in the chain.
Is it possible that the system sounded better with the preamp because the DAC to amp directly had some impedance issues and slipping the preamp in essentially corrected this?
That's likely.
A well designed pre-amp will have a low output impedance to drive whatever load is presented to it by the cables to the power amp and the power amp itself. Source devices are not designed to have that "we can drive anything" capability. I see the three functions of a pre-amp as source selector, level matching and control, output driver and a good quality pre-amp does these things well without introducing distortion in the frequency and time domains which can rob the music of the finest textures.
I found using an Audio Research preamp between my MSB analog DAC and amp made a decent improvement in sound than when it was played directly.
i still don't really understand pre-amps.
I'm no vintage purist or anything. In my opinion, some older recordings can be pretty weak sounding and a more modern recording rig could have worked better for it. Their rigs produced a lot of noise and, for whatever reason, the tonal spectrum was way more limited.
Having said that, there are clear instances where the massive colorization and non-clean signal greatly benefited older recordings.
When I listen to surf rock or big band on Pandora and the playlist mixes vintage recordings with modern recordings, the vintage ones sound far, far, far better with few exceptions. And the modern recordings are certainly more crystal clear, less noise, etc.
So once again, which is "better" is not a simple formula.
Seriously, just think of a song like Box Tops "The Letter" or "Stairway to Heaven" or "Be My Baby." No matter how they recorded those songs, you wouldn't want to change a thing or touch one aspect to it. I feel the same way about many recordings from many eras using all sorts of techniques.
I went through the passive volume control vs. preamp. With analog, a preamp is VERY necessary. Even with a good pre, the interconnects make a BIG difference. What I believe to be happening, is with a signal voltage, a little loss in current results in voltage variation. the cure seems to be to trade current for voltage, or at least have the current maintain the voltage. I have an interconnect design that I filed for a patent on, and after much effort, gave up because a Vietnamese working for the fed said the paper work wasn't done "professionally". Why is that a problem? I finally gave up after about a year of working on the paper work. The pattern allowed a simple interconnect to function like a balanced system.
give advice on how to do this? (if it's not difficult) - there is no money for a good preamplifier, the sound from the DAC goes to a direct power amplifier with a volume control
I have watched several of your posts regarding audio, and you are obviously very knowledgeable. I have a Marantz 2230 I was using as a pre-amp to my NAD power amp, a CD player, and KEF speakers. This system sounded good, but after awhile decided to purchase a Pro-Ject turntable which requires a phono pre-amp, a Sonos Port for streaming, and still using the NAD C268 power amp. As a somewhat new convert to using separates (vs. the integrated, turntable, CD set-up I had prior) I am finding that understanding and learning how to connect each component can be confusing. Are there videos you (or others) do that show visually how (and why) connections between components look?
Thank you! i was just wondering if that would make a difference, im making a handmade Bluetooth speaker and i went for ever to find a good amp for it, so i came across a TDA7492 (It's a D class amplifier), this one has a NE5532 pre amp on it. For what i investigated the NE5532 it's from philips and it's used on motherboards for the audio card that is mounted on board, and sounds pretty nice i would say, (for something that comes with a computer), so this clarifies me a lot of things, thank you.
Hi Paul, you are the best presenter for amplification choices ever. Wonderful!
I like NAD preamps. I'd have one except that I live in an apartment and all the stereo I need is powered by a TubeCube 7, through a pair of Infinity 5 1/4" Kappa coaxials that I mounted in a custom made ported enclosure.
Hey Paul. I Love your channel! I know it’s all subjective and there is so many variables involved when it comes to picking out components. I’ve been putting my 2 channel system together for almost 20 years now. Based on budget I’ve taken my time to put it together. I have a Krell KSL preamp and Oppo. HA-1 dac ( not a big headphone listener although I have a pair of HiFiman headphones). I’m using an old Proceed amp 2 and Dali Grand Coupe speakers with a Marsntz 8004 and Music Hall mmf 7 with Jolida JD9. The funny thing is that my wiring which is all Siltech and Nordost is worth almost as much as the gear. My problem is that I hate the volume control on the Krell. It drives me crazy. It needs to be played loud in order to sound good. Also no remote or digital setting. Do you think if I sell off my Krell and Oppo, and purchase the Stellsr Gain Cell, it will work out for me? I have Tidal HiFi.
I don't know, but i love use preamp input to play my preamp tube or Handphone.
Its has better sound and full range bass until the lowest bass in detail.
Better tan use aux in to play my tube preamp or my handphone.
Have you ever tried sealing Argon into a speaker box to reduce box resonance?
Love your explanation and enthusiasm ... thank you!
it sounds better because it is tweaked to your liking or to the specific room condition.
I totally agreed with you
Mark levision preamp really good
if the pre-amp enhances (read as changing) the sounds, then what you are hearing is not what is in the recording....
"if the pre-amp enhances (read as changing) the sounds" here is where you making your mistake. " Enhance" doesn't mean automatically change. When you take a dirty hazy, grease glass (think of sound) and you clean it so it's clean and it sparkles again it's the same glass it's just crystal clear.
I beg to differ. I've tried both and my experience says that a passive preamp produces a cleaner and purer sound than an active preamp. One of the reasons for that is bc the signal is not degraded and compromised by a host of circuit and components contained in the active preamp. Admittedly, I haven't listened to the best active preamp, but even so it does not detract from the fact that the signal suffers from some degradation and impurity.
Not necessarily. This is not a cut and dried situation. There are a lot of variables to consider like input to output impedance matching, source voltage/gain, etc. A good Class A preamp can be indistinguishable resolution-wise from a passive while creating a greater sense of space and texture, for instance. But it's all system dependent, not one size fits all.
Paul. Thank you for the info. I am starting my journey into the stereo and theater sound world. At this time most money is going elsewhere, like education and collecting guitars, so I find myself starting modestly with perhaps "non" audiophile products. For example, I am considering investing in an Emotiva Amp, preamp, DAC system. Curious how you (or anyone reading) would regard this company. My long term goal is to invest cash in McIntosh Audio Systems, they are really big around where I live. I don't have many places to choose from, and the ones that are around here stock themselves with McIntosh, NAD, Anthem and Parasound. Peace.
I prefer to have separates, need multiple source inputs, and absolutely want tone controls. That means I pretty much have to use a preamp. I think vintage Adcom preamps and power amps from the 80's and 90's offer some of the best bang for the buck on the hi-fi market. They're somewhere between tough and impossible to beat for the money.
I don't understand the question or the answer. Many integrated amp are in fact preamps married to a separate built in amp. Marantz is one of those companies that use that design, but there are others. Because I use a separate amp for my best speakers, I use the preamp section of my Marantz unit without using the amp.
Hi Paul it does a different job than an equalizer, what you just explained sounds like an equalizer, but I'm also thinking there's more if a preamp does that to music if you add an equalizer and a preamp what happens.
Yes a good preamp just sounds more real and yes a tube preamp is much more likely to give you that big open soundstage and more holographic /room filling sound.I have heard that time and again with Supratek preamps for example.I remember hearing one of them inserted into a very good system using Magico speakers and Audio Flight Strumento pre and power amps and the difference it made was huge-from sounding good to sounding wonderful.And the Supratek was about a third the price of the Audio Flight SS preamp.
I love to hear these reports on stereo Paul is a National Treasure I love the old guy over in London England to
Search "Stereo Review X" on UA-cam. He sure is fun to listen to.
I have a preamp for my turntable simply because the phono in put in my receiver was decidedly inferior in terms of sound and output. I was about to get a new turntable, which may or may not have improved things but would not really solve the cause of the problem. So even though some components "take" a turntable, (phono) it is will not save you having to use one of your rca jacks if you end up having to get good sound out of your turntable (unless your turntable has a good built in preamp).
I remain a big fan of the PS Audio 5.5 in totally passive mode. Thanks Paul!
Bottom line short answer - NO; the only reason for passing an audio signal through an additional pre-amp is to either 1) raise the level 2) provide an alteration to frequency response e.g. RIAA compensation. 3) altering impedance e.g. emitter or cathode follower
Another fun and informative vid. Thanks Paul.
...A bit of a ridiculous title for this video. ..
Of course my preamp matters to the over overall sound of my audio system.
That confirms it, buying one next week. I do however have a question
I will be using an RCA mixer in the main channel along with the RCA going to the back of the stereo
The stereo has an aux cable at the front and was having issues with a Bluetooth audio transmitter, can't quite describe the sound but it was nothing like plugging an aux cable in
Worst case I could use an audio device switch. But that might impact the sound quality
great vid. i just wish all power amps had volume control
Yall just came out with the fr 30!!!!! Congrats
I still use one of your phono stages with pasive Pre.
If all your audio amplification is done by solid state transistorized or integrated circuitry; you need a tube preamp in the frontend! That is all it takes to make your system sound absolutely wonderful! That 2nd harmonic is the key. She sounds beautiful.
Oh. thx.
I fell on this subject because I was thinking..how could I bring my Akai 4000 DS preamp up to a higher snuff. There's got to be something out there, swappable even, but I'm not finding it. Shoot, I could add a BT communication add on too.
Now the real question for me is, what would be the best low end preamp that could go into a scarlett 2i2 3rd generation, into MacBook into garage band that would make the recording more homogeneous and professional sounding.
The best sound improvment I've ever done to my music was to dump the damn preamp and replace it with autoformer passive volume control.
Please what that control thing all about give me more clue
I think you need to check the specs the specs. Some offer more connection without dropping the voltage, some in addition increase the line voltage and some have more frequency separation and is more dynamic. There is a reason why music from a phone 3.5 mm sometimes sound better even though the voltage is lower but it is more dynamic than some pre out from head unit so a high quality pre amp will help with frequency separation and being more dynamic. Lastly not selling any product here but last year db drive and company like focal makes some loudspeaker component system which help prevent the loud speaker beaming and distorted with high frequency. People believe if they put a mid range speaker and tweeter with a cap or crossover on a full range signal wire that the mid range won't get any high frequency signal that is false. This one of the main reason mid range speaker sounds terrible at high volume because when the midrange get high frequency causing it distort and start to beam.
That is why i got myself a Parasound PLD 2000☺️
Paul in your discussion today you said ok to using the preamp where (inputs) would i place your dac? thank you dave Gongwer Duluth,Minn.
Apparently many modern receivers don't have the best phono stages, so buying an external one of a minimum quality seems to provide a positive experience.
i would love to have a job like that. seems really intersting
If you go for vinyl get a good RIIA pre-amp. If all your music is digital go for a good DAC. I have a Rega DAC before the signal goes into my NAD C272, and from there to my JBL LT 100. No pre-amp is needed, lots of power, and good sound. :)
I was just here to learn about amps but... I recognize those mountains... and that bridge!.. Actually I think my dad worked in one of those buildings to the right! Small fricking world.
I plugged my Cambridge audio CXV v2 straight into the Emotiva A150 power amp and used the digital preamp feature of the CXN, it sounded thin and sterile. I used my Yamaha DSP A1 as a preamp and it was much better. Playing the CXN into my Sansui G7000 receiver was much better
Hi, Using the digital preamp feature of my CXNV2 gave me the opportunity to get a remote volume control ( with streammagic app) for my vintage gear. connected as a source in my Sansui Eight,, CXNV2 was fine, but pluggin in the Main Amp direct input of the EIGHT is much better in terms of sound ( space, less sibilance)...no dull at all, but maybe the preamp section needs a revision ( that i did on the driver/power amp amp)
Every additional component added to any signal chain will alter the signal away from the original. This may be desirable, but there will always be some undesired alteration.
This includes all-in-one receivers. Just because the components share a box and power supply does not mean they do not introduce undesirable alterations.
Even if you keep the signal digital, each subsequent processing will introduce undesired alterations along with the desired ones. If there are no desired alterations, then there's no use for the component/processing plug in. And, of course, you cannot separate the desired from the undesired alterations - you have to take the good with the bad.
Another argument I have is - most people use a computer or laptop to manage their digital sources. But have you looked at the specs of those analog outputs? They're terrible. So you feed the digital information to a separate DAC.... isn't that now your preamp?
And even if your amp takes the digital information - it still has a DAC separate from the amplification. It's still no different than the all-in-one receiver... having a DAC in the same box as the Amp does not integrate the two into one component.
Part of the problem I've found with all digital processing is that audio software processing is either crap, or super expensive. For instance - there's lots of crappy digital equalization programs out there, but a dynamic range enhancer is very rare and expensive. Most surround sound processing requires the source to be encoded. Which means they do nothing for the legacy music collection I've built up over the last 30 years. Analog surround sound processors that do not require encoding are expensive and often have low S:N ratios, digital processing programs that don't require encoded sources are expensive, rare, and often don't do the job as well as their analog counterpart. I would love to find a 64 bit computer app version of the Yamaha DSP-1 and the DBX 4bx. Add in a good digital eq. app, and your digital system will be worthy of any DAC/Amp/speaker combo.
The only thing missing, is that the DSP-1 does not use a center channel. But that's a relatively minor software mod these days. Most music media shouldn't be using the center channel much anyway - as it's mainly for movies and video.
are we talking about the preamp that goes after the microphone in a recording session? I kind of lost in the example of the comparisson