Best Preamp - NO preamp... (?)

Thank you all for your thoughts.
I totally get it that it's always a personal preference, and depends on component output level, input gain, and impedance matching.
Some DACs don't even offer a variable gain output so for those it's not even an option.
My amp is a very low power Yamamoto A08S so I use the volume between 70-100% anyway, no 'lost' resolution issues.
Other than the need to match gain or impedance, I find it hard to imagine how having the passive preamp in the signal path can make things 'better'.
It makes the signal pass through additional connectors and IC cable, internal wiring, solder points, input selector, and volume control. The passive preamp I have is considered one of the best you can get at any price point, and removing it from the signal path had such a profound positive impact that I still can't believe it's even the same system. Active preamps should be worse in that regard, no matter how good they are, as the signal travels through many more components. 
I had a friend come over last night, who is very familiar with my system, and he too was shocked what a difference it made, He texted me this morning that he couldn't sleep last night after hearing my system, and is now thinking of selling his excellent gear, and getting the exact same setup as mine. I must be very lucky to find such a perfect match :-)
I still need to check how it works with my phono stage, but my TT is going for service this week. I honestly think that even if it doesn't work well, I will be looking for another phono stage that does work well, and will not even consider putting a preamp back in the system.
Highly recommended everybody - Give it a try! 
:-)

I think my point for discussion is actually better phrased this way:
Instead of looking for a best (objective) match between 3 components, source-preamp-amp, perhaps we should be looking for the best direct source-amp match, eliminating the preamp altogether. Unless you need multiple sources of course.
This should be an overall easier task as way fewer combinations are possible, and the potential benefit is much higher as the signal path is significantly shorter.
For gain / impedance matching, a simple resistor divider network can do the trick instead of a full blown preamp...
I know there are decent RCA and XLR attenuators out there for sale.
If you need the gain boost that an active preamp provides, wouldn't you be better off looking for a source with higher output, or an amp with higher gain?

Thanks for your input czarivey,
Fortunately, my power amp is so gorgeous looking with it's Japanese cherry wood finish, that I have it on the top shelf of my rack (also for better heat dissipation of course :-). Therefore, changing the IC cables is very easy and convenient. I don't even have to bend.
My DAC has only one output, and all I did is disconnect it from the preamp input, and hook it up directly to the power amp, so I was using the same active line stage in both cases.
I don't understand how adding another active component in the signal path can make things better, but i'm always open to learn and experience.
I tried a few highly regarded preamps before, and my passive outperformed them all.

Thanks for all your comments!

RE: shorter path / better parts with preamp - I doubt that is the case here. The passive I was using has a $400 P&G volume pot, and the volume control of the DS DAC is a digital one AFAIK, so it introduces no additional components in the signal path.

RE: a more expensive passive or some 'magic' signal processors, I am still to be convinced that adding anything in the signal path, no matter how good, can make things better.

RE: What is "better"? that is something I can't argue with. If you like the specific distortion or the coloration that a component introduces, then by all means, go for it. I am on the search for "Hi-Fi" - transparency and not coloration. I am of the opinion that if you need to add a preamp to make up for your speaker's deficiencies, you should be looking for better speakers.

RE: PS Audio BHK, I will ask Paul in the PS audio forum again. It will be interesting to hear his answer :-)

Have a wonderful weekend all!
 

Thanks for the detailed post Mitch.
I totally agree with you that if your source and amp gain and/or impedance are mismatched, an active unit may improve the overall result.
What i'm questioning is the common approach on how to solve this mismatch.
My suggestion is that you might be better off trying to find a better matched source-amp combination than introducing an active pre-amp to make them work well together. 
If you invest the money you save on the preamp, and get an upgraded and better matched source or amp, the overall result may be much better than having to introduce a preamp as a 'match maker' for a 'given' source and amp.

I would like to add a quote from Ted Smith that addresses cable capacitance as well, which was posted on the PS Audio forum regarding the DS DAC direct to amp approach. The key sentence here IMHO is

• "We don’t always build our systems from whole cloth where we might have the opportunity to find a set of components with no interface issues: a preamp is a good thing to have on hand for the cases where other factors like gain mismatch or cable length or… get in the way of a well balanced system." - 
  

So why not strive for a well balanced, preamp-less system to begin with?

Here is the full quote:

“There are two issues that come to mind: gain (which has already been mentioned) and the other is cable capacitance.

With respect to gain, there’s a “best” sensitivity of amp to use with the DS direct: you need enough headroom to have dynamic music (even on your louder tracks) but also enough sensitivity that you aren’t using the volume control far from 100 a lot of the time. Obviously if your music collection has tracks that are significantly different in loudness or dynamic range or if the amp isn’t sensitive enough or is way too sensitive you’ll probably want a preamp.
With cables that have too high of a capacitance there are FR response issues with almost any source. With most sources high capacitance implies a high frequency rolloff, but at times the transformer output of the DS can interact with cable capacitance to add a little high frequency boost. In an already existent system that already has high capacitance cables but is otherwise balanced changing from some other DAC to a DS may make quite a difference in the very top of the audio band. Either a rolloff or a boost of the highs could be beneficial in some setups, but in general, average to lower capacitance cables will be better with the DS or you’ll need a preamp to drive/buffer a higher capacitance or long run cables after the DS.
My counter argument to the minimalist point of view is that “Why should you expect a $6000 preamp in a $6000 DAC for free?” We don’t always build our systems from whole cloth where we might have the opportunity to find a set of components with no interface issues: a preamp is a good thing to have on hand for the cases where other factors like gain mismatch or cable length or… get in the way of a well balanced system.
Given a particular amp the DS could be designed so that you probably wouldn’t want a preamp – and similarly given the DS an amp could be designed so you probably don’t want a preamp, but in real life, as all things in audiophile land, you’ll need to listen for yourself to different setups and make up your own mind.”

Hi George,
I'm very impressed with your candor:

And if his source (AMR CD-77.1) had a volume control of it’s own, it would have sounded even better to him direct.

Wow... coming from the manufacturer of the product, that is rare.
If I ever consider a passive again, (for this system or another one) your Lightspeed attenuator will be the first one I'll try.

@geoffkait and how about a speaker switcher unit for better kicks?

@georgehifi  +1
Since I opened this thread almost 2 years ago, I have had the chance to audition a few other preamps in the loop, just to amuse my audiophile friends who insisted 'But you haven't heard XYZ preamp yet... it will take your system to another league...'
These included the PS Audio BHK signature preamp, and top-of-the-line ARC and CJ, among a few less known brands, mostly >$10K units, all with rave reviews by leading magazines, and in this forum...
The $6K PS Audio BHK signature was the only one that came close to having no preamp at all, but still a clear second best.
All but 2 (one who uses only an analog source, and one who will never admit to be wrong) of these skeptics, that brought their 'holy grail' preamps for audition, ended up selling them shortly thereafter, and getting the PS Audio DSD DAC with Bridge II, and the DMP transport as a digital source... ;-) 

Yep @georgehifi ... No one knows, but I doubt it, as Paul McGowan is one of the rare, brutally honest, no BS guys I've had the pleasure of knowing in this business. He was not ashamed to admit in the PS Audio forums, that a $10 Chinese made Amazon HDMI cable bettered his $400 PS Audio silver I2S cable. I bought that cable, and he was right... I'm still using it today.
And we need to remember that their setup is not the same as mine.
They tested the BHK preamp driving their solid state BHK power amps.
I use a flea-power Yamamoto A08S SET tube amplifier, which might happen to be a better match for the direct output of the DSD DAC than a solid state amp. 
It could also be that my speakers, a set of $6K Zu Audio Druids Mk V, don't reveal what the $50K Infinity IRS-V do (or the other way around?).
And yet... it might be the $$$, or just him giving ultimate respect for Mr. Bascom H. King. :-)