Preamps... nothing is perfect.
- Thread starter MadFloyd
- Start date
A 2m Elation IC will have an impedance around 10 kohm at 10 kHz due to its capacitance - this can be enough to change the sound balance of a system in certain cases. If you look at the distortion spectra of preamplifiers you will see that sometimes see it changes significantly when they have to deliver current. Sometimes a very high capacitance means a lot of dielectric material.
Remember that each case is a particular case.
Yeah, I'm with the crowd who says KS is not neutral and Keith makes a good point. I would agree.
And as I mentioned, with D4 having a more forward presentation coupled with slightly tizzy highs compared to most other cables I've auditioned, I wouldn't recommend it for systems where fatigue is the complaint. Something more even-handed and laid back will go a long way in that case. If you audition the Masterbuilt (even the Reference line), I think you'll see what I mean. The Reference line has some sonic drawbacks, but you should experience a noticeable fatigue reduction vs D4. The Dart stuff is fantastic, and you should give it a chance to shine IMO.
How would you describe the differences (e.g. tonal balance) between KS Elation and the D4s - besides what you're hearing as tizzy highs on the D4s?
I haven't done a direct compare of those two in the same system at the same time. But my notes on the KS are along the lines of having a mid-range push, but with better frequency extension than other KS I've heard, and lacking the resolution of some of cables that I prefer. That said, I'd expect to hear notable differences between the KS and D4 side by side, in my system. If you don't, that might be a function of system transparency.
Wow.
First you speculate after not having heard the cables side by side, and then based on those speculations you take a speculative dig at Ian's system, which is very transparent and sensitive to cable changes. Great job, Bazelio.
Have you ever thought about the possibility that findings about cables can be system/room dependent, and what you hear in your system/room may not hold for others? I have heard Ian's system many times and there are no 'tizzy' highs with the D4 cable. Nor are there in mine, as I pointed out in a previous post.
Al M.,
We do it all the time, why such admiration now?
BTW, can you tell us what means exactly "very sensitive to cables" in your sentence?
Slow down, Al. We get it, you own a D4 cable and don't want to read a potentially negative comment. Is Bazelio's opinion any less valid in his system which you haven't heard? His Marten speakers aren't exactly known to be colored either. He's just reporting his experience, nothing wrong with that.
Nothing wrong with that indeed, I agree, Keith. Bazelio's experience may well hold for his system/room, which I implied in the next paragraph that you did not quote. If he doesn't like the D4 cable that's his business. However, he pretends as if his findings must hold universally, such that if someone does not hear the alleged problems or cable differences, something must be wrong with their system.
I said "sensitive to cable changes". Another way of saying the system is transparent.
IMHO not forcefully. Some systems - please note I am not referring to any specific system! - are very sensitive to cable changes because they are poorly balanced, or just hyper detailed.
But yes, people use the word transparency with a lot of meanings - it is why I usually avoid it.
Heh, well it's the same ole, same ole. Par for the course.
I was simply making relative observations, and don't think much of the theory that a room will make one cable sound forward and lit up, while also making another cable sound comparatively laid back and dark. It's certainly a matter of degree and a more acoustically dead room than mine will help a cable like the D4. But my comment wasn't negative and I stand by it: If fatigue is the complaint, then D4 isn't the best choice. And I don't know what's so controversial about system transparency affecting cable impressions. That's just common sense.
Back to the OP, what is the general opinion on 'A Good Pre-amp is No Pre-amp' statement. There was a flurry of interest around using a passive a few years ago. And for those with a one sure system, some may argue you can go direct to your power amp if the DAC has an attenuator.
The common argument against a passive inline between the DAC and Power amp has been the impedance shift. But I found a convincing article that stated an inline attenuator is not an impedance in, impedance out device, rather an inline resistance only.
Thoughts?
http://www.rothwellaudioproducts.co.uk/html/the_truth_about_passive_pre-am.html
The common argument against a passive inline between the DAC and Power amp has been the impedance shift. But I found a convincing article that stated an inline attenuator is not an impedance in, impedance out device, rather an inline resistance only.
Thoughts?
http://www.rothwellaudioproducts.co.uk/html/the_truth_about_passive_pre-am.html
Reading from the link
"Compare that output impedance to the many valve pre-amps which follow minimalist design principles. They tend to have very high output impedances - certainly higher than 3750 ohms and quite commonly 10k or 20k or even more"
Which preamp has that high output impedance? Hmm
Yes you can "model" a resistor attenuator ,with just an "in line resistor" added to the source's output impedance.
That is why resistor attenuators can never be "top notch" solutions for volume control.
A TVC attenuator does have input and output impedance.And it's output impedance is many times lower the input.
"Compare that output impedance to the many valve pre-amps which follow minimalist design principles. They tend to have very high output impedances - certainly higher than 3750 ohms and quite commonly 10k or 20k or even more"
Which preamp has that high output impedance? Hmm
Yes you can "model" a resistor attenuator ,with just an "in line resistor" added to the source's output impedance.
That is why resistor attenuators can never be "top notch" solutions for volume control.
A TVC attenuator does have input and output impedance.And it's output impedance is many times lower the input.
Back to the OP, what is the general opinion on 'A Good Pre-amp is No Pre-amp' statement. There was a flurry of interest around using a passive a few years ago. And for those with a one sure system, some may argue you can go direct to your power amp if the DAC has an attenuator.
The common argument against a passive inline between the DAC and Power amp has been the impedance shift. But I found a convincing article that stated an inline attenuator is not an impedance in, impedance out device, rather an inline resistance only.
Thoughts?
http://www.rothwellaudioproducts.co.uk/html/the_truth_about_passive_pre-am.html
Not all passives are alike. I'm using an AVC (autoformer) based passive line stage - similar to TVC although simpler. I'm definitely a "no preamp" is the best preamp guy at this point, and won't be going back to actives. Intuitively, there is no way in my mind that an extra power supply and active devices in the signal path can ever improve the sound (save for system impedance mismatch resolution, but see below). It can color and veil the sound which can be a matter of taste, but it can not objectively improve it. Now, in my estimation, my AVC is roughly 90-95% of "no preamp" in sound quality. And it is humorously better than any active line stage I've heard. I was able to test "no preamp" vs the AVC when I had an amp with rear-mounted per-channel volume control.
Now, impedance matching may not be an issue with an AVC passive in many systems. The load is reduced 50% for every 3dB you attenuate. I have enough gain in my system - as do 99% of systems - that even with the passive line stage, I'm at about 55% attenuated (say 11:00) for a loud listening volume. 11:00 is about -28dB, so the load is reduced by over 100x which means the source really sees only the inductive reactance of the autoformer since the 220 kOhm input impedance of my Dartzeel amp becomes trivially light at that point. My autoformer is a Slagle, and Dave says it is gapped at about 100H, which is about 12 kOhm all the way down at 20Hz and rises from there. Stereophile measured my EAR phono OI to be 60 Ohm. So 12000:60 = 200:1. Not bad at all. The result: transparency, inner detail, and articulation that are second to none.
Don't have any experience with Slagle's autoformers but for a couple of years tried living with a copper Stevens @ Billington. It didn't work out. Active stages are much more difficult and expensive, but for me indispensable for the enjoyment of music.
Nope. Kuzma M -> EAR 324 -> Slagle AVC -> Dartzeel amp.
Clarity and inner detail are paramount for connecting with the music to me. Vinyl itself and likely my phono SUT have just enough tonal saturation, while the AVC device can't be beat in those other areas. At least not yet...
Do you have complete measurements of your Dave Slagle autotransformer? I own and have measured distortion at several frequencies and levels of a few line audio transformers from Jensen, Lundhal, Sony high-end and all of them had a clear sonic signature showing in the measurements. Curiously the worst measuring one just looking at one figure measurement - an unknown brand used in the FlexConnect was by far subjectively the best sounding!
Can I ask why do you consider that the considerable distortion and noise of your DartZeel power amplifier improves sound quality and that of the preamplfiers does not improve sound quality?
Nope, haven't measured, only listened. Line transformers are a bit different, as are TVCs, having primary and secondary windings. But, yes, these devices have a signature, as do the AVCs. That's why I said it's about 90-95% of the sound quality of "no preamp". I can hear the "slight" signature it imposes. But again, the level of transparency compared to active alternatives is still much greater. I'm using the Slagle AVC with copper windings, as opposed to silver windings which I've been told reduce the AVC signature further (though it might be very subtle). I'd characterize the signature of the copper Slagle as a slight roundness with a touch of tonal richness and a slight veil vs no preamp. I'd really like to give the silver version a spin to compare but I haven't had the opportunity thus far.
Devices that make gain are different animals. Designing them for ultra low THD on paper actually involves tradeoffs which, to my ears, doesn't produce a good result. I've heard a handful of such amps, and the result is typically a sound which is overly compressed and rather dead. In my opinion, subjective and objective design philosophies must co-exist. You can read Herve Deletraz's thoughts on why he consciously decided *not* to design for THD specs and his first order design goals and overall design philosophy with Dartzeel amps. I'm a huge fan of the result.