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 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.
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.
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)
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.
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 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 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.
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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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
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.
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!
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
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....
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)
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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
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.
Paul now you have carte blanche, does the PCA-2 pre amp (w/out external power supply) sound as good or better than a Bryston BP-25 or Benchmark DAC1 driving an amp directly? Asking for a friend who doesn't want to make a lateral move on this.
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.
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
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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 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?
As I've gotten older, I've come to find it curious how many "audiophiles" will turn their nose up at "coloration" and "euphonic distortion", when their actual ears are telling them that the components they're sneering at are making the music more engaging and enjoyable? And as a musician and recording engineer, the audiophile obsession with "accuracy" seems absurd to me. Recordings aren't accurate, period. All recordings are impressionistic, an opinionated interpretation of the original sounds rather than a perfect rendition. But recordings are still music, still capable of engaging our hearts and minds. Why not build a hi-fi system that maximizes that engagement, rather than chasing an ideal that our ears tell us is inferior?
@I was with your mother If Bose and Beats make people happy, they should use them. And if chasing hi-fi purity makes people happy, they should do that. My gripe isn't the hi-fi, it's the belief that it's somehow "accurate", when the recording process itself is so impressionistic. Honestly, what makes me happy is live mostly-acoustic instruments, not recordings. I play guitar more than I listen to recordings, often just to enjoy the pure tones of an acoustic guitar. And I prefer small acoustic jams to big amplified concerts most of the time.
@@davestagner My dear uncle who passed a couple years ago, was forever listening to his radio. I had the pleasure of spending a fair amount of time with him, as he needed more and more help in his old age. Long story short, his radio gave out and I wanted to get him a new one. I was at a flea market and ran across an old tube radio. I had to get it, as I thought he would appreciate the nostalgia. When I plugged it in and turned it on, it was myself who was in awe of the nostalgic tone. I was blown away, by a radio! I couldn't believe it. I still can't. The warmth of the sound was amazing. From what I understand, the tubes produce a distortion. If that is so, it is a distortion I really like. I have a decent set up, with a pair of old JBL L65's. I am by no means an audiophile, but I catch your drift. As much as I like my setup, that danged old tube radio still haunts me.
@@wciii3591 The idea that tube hi-fi is "distorted" is a misnomer passed on by the same delusional audiophiles I'm talking about, based on the reality that tube guitar amps are distorted (which they are). The same people like to quote "total harmonic distortion" specs, which is a measurement of how well an amp reproduces a 1khz sine wave into a resistive load. That's not how speakers work, and that's not how music works. My take is that tube hi-fi sounds better because it's LESS distorted!
@@johnm3544 "Should NOT" is irrelevant here. I'm saying what is, not what should be. I don't know if you're a musician, but I am. I don't know if you've produced albums, but I have. The moment you hear a fingerpicked acoustic guitar that's as loud as a drum kit, you're deep in the land of impressionism. The moment you have two microphones and someone makes a conscious decision to their relative levels, it's impressionism. And when a mix engineer uses a high-pass eq to keep guitars and keyboards from muddying up the bass guitar and kick drum, or uses compressors to shape attack speed so instruments move forward or backward in the mix, or applies artificial reverb, it's very impressionistic. Heck, close-miking an instrument and then using a distant room mic to pick up natural reverberation, and then balancing them in the mix? Impressionism. Cardioid microphones have polar patterns that are frequency and distance dependent, so the distance and angle of the mic relative to the source applies a significant equalizatoin - also impressionistic, since an engineer made a conscious decision on mic placement, for that reason. And what of overdubs? Stereo recording with any conscious balance control is impressionism. So is mono recording. Sorry, but it's true. The closest thing to a truly "natural", non-interpreted recording is small bluegrass combos using a single microphone, with band members stepping in and out to adjust their volume balance on the fly. And as an occasional bluegrass musician, I can assure you that what you hear on that recording is not what the performers standing around the mic are hearing. Virtually the entire history of popular recorded music since the arrival of the four-track tape recorder has been solidly impresssionistic. Outside of narrow categories of folk, classical, and possibly jazz recordings, the recording and mixing engineers have a powerful and opinionated role in the sound of the records you love. All of them. They cannot NOT have an opinion. It'd be like a baker dumping dry flour on your plate and pouring some water and yeast over it, because they didn't want to express an opinion by baking it. The idea of music recordings as some sort of objective truth is a fantasy, a delusion.
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 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
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.
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.
isn't plugging in the turntable into to the amplifier the normal route? i don't understand what the pre-amp does. I am new to this so pardon my ignorance.
It is the normal route for a receiver or integrated, yes. That's probably what you're thinking of. But we like separates better. Separates are where we break the single box of integrated or receiver into multiple boxes, like a separate preamp, and separate power amplifier.
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?
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?
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 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.
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.
Hi may I suggest the separate mono amps are put at the speaker and use longer coax leads from pre amp. Long speaker cable into low impedance speaker will / can result in voltage drop / power loss. The long leads from the pre amp may have a couple of ohms but are feeding a higher impedance. If you do the math you will find voltage distribution between cable and load ( amps input) is far better and nowhere near the problem of speaker cables. Capacitance is an issue yes and can reduce high frequency but at audio I don't think you could tell at RF can be obvious . Enjoy the music.
On a hybrid set up, would you use the monitor outs on the console or on the focusrite 18i20... Question number two how could I set up my patch bay for both options. Thank you for your time
I got other questions relate to this. For instance, I use my computer to feed my DAC which has optional pre-amp. Should I active/de-active when I use the xlr cables to feed my Dynaudio active speaker? If I don't use the pre-amp, I have to control the volume in my computer through software. Which way is better? Or in general, I am quite confuse about the software volume control.
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.
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).
Well, if you like the sound of added harmonic distortion, then great, but that's a different issue to fidelity. Unless it is performing some kind of impedance matching because the line out from the DAC is too high impedance, or the line in on the amp is too low impedance, then there is not way for it to make the amp see a more accurate version of the signal coming from the DAC. You can only ever reduce fidelity. But that's OK if that's what you want, for the same reason that valve guitar amps are popular. Valve distortion sounds nice.
More to it than just adding distortion. I suspect most amplifiers are just not operating at their best from the signal directly off the DAC. The space around instruments and details I'm hearing are most certainly not distortions. I know what tubes sound like, and my Parasound P3 is not making tube sounds.
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 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.
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.
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)
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.
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 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
You’ll be happy to know your good at these shows .thank you for the knowledge
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 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.
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!
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
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)
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.
yes they do and expensive it is especially when recording along with mics and convertors, all in one unit the prism lyra
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.
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.
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 love my preamp, the onkyo p304. i always thought it simply directed signal. thanks for sharing the knowledge
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.
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.
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.
Wow that explanation seals the deal Mr. Paul always explains it better, thanks
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
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.
Hi Paul, you are the best presenter for amplification choices ever. Wonderful!
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
20 year ago I selling and set up PS audio's Amplifier, And now we learn more about it from the founder !
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.
Love your explanation and enthusiasm ... thank you!
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.
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
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.
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
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
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
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....
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)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
Have you ever tried sealing Argon into a speaker box to reduce box resonance?
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.
Subscribed. Gotta support our fellow audiophiles.
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 totally agreed with you
Mark levision preamp really good
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.
Paul now you have carte blanche, does the PCA-2 pre amp (w/out external power supply) sound as good or better than a Bryston BP-25 or Benchmark DAC1 driving an amp directly? Asking for a friend who doesn't want to make a lateral move on this.
Hi Paul. Many good quality preamplifiers have burr brown dac incorporated in the circuitry.
YOU ARE THE grandFather of Pre Amp Knowledge!!!
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.
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
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.
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.
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).
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.
Hi , even if I have a integrated tube amp do you think a tube pre will make a difference? Thanks
hi watched most of your videos, how do i get in touch with you i need some serious advice. thankyou
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.
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 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.
But why technically? What is the mechanism at work?
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?
What is the "certain quality" in preamps that you keep mentioning?
Don't look for things that don't exist (because that's what the snake oil salesmen wants you to do).
Biff Narzilla maybe... crisp highs, definite mediums, powerful bass, maybe, ...a matter of personal taste.
As I've gotten older, I've come to find it curious how many "audiophiles" will turn their nose up at "coloration" and "euphonic distortion", when their actual ears are telling them that the components they're sneering at are making the music more engaging and enjoyable? And as a musician and recording engineer, the audiophile obsession with "accuracy" seems absurd to me. Recordings aren't accurate, period. All recordings are impressionistic, an opinionated interpretation of the original sounds rather than a perfect rendition. But recordings are still music, still capable of engaging our hearts and minds. Why not build a hi-fi system that maximizes that engagement, rather than chasing an ideal that our ears tell us is inferior?
@I was with your mother If Bose and Beats make people happy, they should use them. And if chasing hi-fi purity makes people happy, they should do that. My gripe isn't the hi-fi, it's the belief that it's somehow "accurate", when the recording process itself is so impressionistic.
Honestly, what makes me happy is live mostly-acoustic instruments, not recordings. I play guitar more than I listen to recordings, often just to enjoy the pure tones of an acoustic guitar. And I prefer small acoustic jams to big amplified concerts most of the time.
@@davestagner My dear uncle who passed a couple years ago, was forever listening to his radio. I had the pleasure of spending a fair amount of time with him, as he needed more and more help in his old age. Long story short, his radio gave out and I wanted to get him a new one. I was at a flea market and ran across an old tube radio. I had to get it, as I thought he would appreciate the nostalgia. When I plugged it in and turned it on, it was myself who was in awe of the nostalgic tone. I was blown away, by a radio! I couldn't believe it. I still can't. The warmth of the sound was amazing.
From what I understand, the tubes produce a distortion. If that is so, it is a distortion I really like. I have a decent set up, with a pair of old JBL L65's. I am by no means an audiophile, but I catch your drift. As much as I like my setup, that danged old tube radio still haunts me.
@@wciii3591 The idea that tube hi-fi is "distorted" is a misnomer passed on by the same delusional audiophiles I'm talking about, based on the reality that tube guitar amps are distorted (which they are). The same people like to quote "total harmonic distortion" specs, which is a measurement of how well an amp reproduces a 1khz sine wave into a resistive load. That's not how speakers work, and that's not how music works. My take is that tube hi-fi sounds better because it's LESS distorted!
@@davestagner I guess I like less distorted then.
@@johnm3544 "Should NOT" is irrelevant here. I'm saying what is, not what should be. I don't know if you're a musician, but I am. I don't know if you've produced albums, but I have. The moment you hear a fingerpicked acoustic guitar that's as loud as a drum kit, you're deep in the land of impressionism. The moment you have two microphones and someone makes a conscious decision to their relative levels, it's impressionism. And when a mix engineer uses a high-pass eq to keep guitars and keyboards from muddying up the bass guitar and kick drum, or uses compressors to shape attack speed so instruments move forward or backward in the mix, or applies artificial reverb, it's very impressionistic. Heck, close-miking an instrument and then using a distant room mic to pick up natural reverberation, and then balancing them in the mix? Impressionism. Cardioid microphones have polar patterns that are frequency and distance dependent, so the distance and angle of the mic relative to the source applies a significant equalizatoin - also impressionistic, since an engineer made a conscious decision on mic placement, for that reason. And what of overdubs?
Stereo recording with any conscious balance control is impressionism. So is mono recording. Sorry, but it's true.
The closest thing to a truly "natural", non-interpreted recording is small bluegrass combos using a single microphone, with band members stepping in and out to adjust their volume balance on the fly. And as an occasional bluegrass musician, I can assure you that what you hear on that recording is not what the performers standing around the mic are hearing.
Virtually the entire history of popular recorded music since the arrival of the four-track tape recorder has been solidly impresssionistic. Outside of narrow categories of folk, classical, and possibly jazz recordings, the recording and mixing engineers have a powerful and opinionated role in the sound of the records you love. All of them. They cannot NOT have an opinion. It'd be like a baker dumping dry flour on your plate and pouring some water and yeast over it, because they didn't want to express an opinion by baking it.
The idea of music recordings as some sort of objective truth is a fantasy, a delusion.
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 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
Yall just came out with the fr 30!!!!! Congrats
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.
You are God of the music info thank you
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.
hello, what rosewood speakers are those behind you?
isn't plugging in the turntable into to the amplifier the normal route? i don't understand what the pre-amp does. I am new to this so pardon my ignorance.
It is the normal route for a receiver or integrated, yes. That's probably what you're thinking of. But we like separates better. Separates are where we break the single box of integrated or receiver into multiple boxes, like a separate preamp, and separate power amplifier.
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.
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 have a late 1970s pioneer spec 1 pre-amp and spec 2 power amp. Does this sound like a good setup?
Yeah IT is. I have late Pioneer elite pre/power
The AT LP60X has a built in preamp. Can you preamp the preamp? Meaning using the phono inputs?
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 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.
Hello Paul. Thanks for the video. What tubes preamps would you recomend under 2k?
I dont get this. Pure preamp without any post processing, changes the sound?
Why?
Yes. 👏👏👏
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.
I am setting up a monoblock Red Dragon Amp to my AVR-2808CI. Never done this before, any advice wold be appreciated.
Hi may I suggest the separate mono amps are put at the speaker and use longer coax leads from pre amp. Long speaker cable into low impedance speaker will / can result in voltage drop / power loss. The long leads from the pre amp may have a couple of ohms but are feeding a higher impedance. If you do the math you will find voltage distribution between cable and load ( amps input) is far better and nowhere near the problem of speaker cables. Capacitance is an issue yes and can reduce high frequency but at audio I don't think you could tell at RF can be obvious . Enjoy the music.
On a hybrid set up, would you use the monitor outs on the console or on the focusrite 18i20... Question number two how could I set up my patch bay for both options. Thank you for your time
I remain a big fan of the PS Audio 5.5 in totally passive mode. Thanks Paul!
How do you define a "Good" Preamp?? Is there such thing as a "Good/Quality" $200-$500 preamp for a music streamer like the Bluesound Node??
I got other questions relate to this. For instance, I use my computer to feed my DAC which has optional pre-amp. Should I active/de-active when I use the xlr cables to feed my Dynaudio active speaker? If I don't use the pre-amp, I have to control the volume in my computer through software. Which way is better? Or in general, I am quite confuse about the software volume control.
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.
Paul, I really very very much Love your RCA Mascot... I believe it's a Jack Russell breed. God bless.
That is why i got myself a Parasound PLD 2000☺️
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 have ART MPA gold for pre .... which tube you recommended for change to record instruments?? It use 12ax7/ECC83 ✌✌✌ thxxx cheers ✌
Well, if you like the sound of added harmonic distortion, then great, but that's a different issue to fidelity. Unless it is performing some kind of impedance matching because the line out from the DAC is too high impedance, or the line in on the amp is too low impedance, then there is not way for it to make the amp see a more accurate version of the signal coming from the DAC. You can only ever reduce fidelity. But that's OK if that's what you want, for the same reason that valve guitar amps are popular. Valve distortion sounds nice.
More to it than just adding distortion. I suspect most amplifiers are just not operating at their best from the signal directly off the DAC. The space around instruments and details I'm hearing are most certainly not distortions. I know what tubes sound like, and my Parasound P3 is not making tube sounds.
Easy and understandable , Thanks Paul🤍
Are you talking about preamp for hi fi applications or for something like recording a mic?