Robtn, obviously I could not agree with you more. It was interesting to hear you say, "I mentioned to Mr. Harley that when I read Jonathan Valin saying he misses the "bloom" and "spaciousness" of tubes, with ANY piece of equipment, I cringe. If I want to hear phase manipulation or harmonic distortion, etc., increasing the stage depth and image width, it ought to be on the recording, not being created by my components" because I recently heard from a well-regarded Audiogon member who told me that he has a shoot-out of sorts with LSA and 4 or 5 very highly regarded tube preamps (really good line stages)joined by a group of audiophiles. While they felt the LSA was very good in terms of clarity and transparency, the one area they felt it fell short was in this very area you mention related to spatial representation and dimensionality. But this must really be an issue of preferences as I too get the sense that what imaging is there should be real and from the source and not what you might describe as an artifact, a distortion of sorts. To me, the LSA sounds like what I am looking for, but obviously it might not be everyone's cup of tea. As you point out though, for $450 or so, it is well worth trying without too many preconceptions about tube/ss/passive and just listen, for some listeners, especially those with tube amps the LSA might be as good as it gets. Listened to SACD version of Adderly Somthing else - incredible timbral accuracy, dynamics, and resolution - but a very dimensional recording as recorded. |
I meant to say not very dimensional as recorded. |
Hi Anthony. I meant the battery and connector you provided links to. Would it be a plug&play purchased as is? In terms of the negative/positive pin issue? |
Sounds like the Bolero Test by Arthur Salvatore, which also concludes that if ANY active linestage sounds better than a passive there is an impedance mismatch and the system NEEDS a an active stage. In his view, there is no better connection between a source and amp than the direct connection, and then a passive preamp. Hard to think that all those beautiful tubes in an active tube preamp does not bring beauty and flesh, etc - but it does not seem that any of that is actually in the recording (as the direct connection makes perfectly clear). |
So it seems that true to the source (or at least to the output from the CD/DAC with no impedance mismatch)has to be the standard and that any alteration caused by even the most expensive and sophisticated active preamps is an alteration having nothing to do with what is actually on the recording, not part of the music as recorded, and yet there is an enormous contingent of folks who swear that the passive approach is missing something (staging, PRAT, warmth, etc)that the actives, especially tube actives, provide. But logic seems to dictate that whatever is being heard through the actives simply is no part of the recording, it is coming from somewhere else, a distortion of the signal seems to be the only thing to call it. Any yet, many seem to prefer it, but true to the source it cannot be, or so it seems. Now maybe it is a matter of not being able to take the truth, and pleasant alterations are what people prefer. Ken Stevens of CAT once said he wanted his preamp to have the sound of water, no coloration, clear, transparent. The Lightspeed seems to meet that goal, as long as gain and impedances are what they need to be, if they are not, than an active is needed or the "direct connection" won't work. I do know it is hard to accept that a "simple" attenuator can possibly be better than a 50lb, $10,000 preamp full of stuff, and there is nothing in the LSA nearly as endearing as a NOS Amperex tube. |
Anthony, I agree. There are many reasons to own a full-featured, robust active preamp and yes, even the "audio jewelry" aspect is as legitimate as any other reason for prefering a piece of gear.
What I am missing is the "active" argument solely on the basis of sound in a system with appropriate gain and impedance matches. There was some conversation earlier on about "true to the source", and by that I don't mean true to the live event being recorded, but true to everything in the signal coming out of the source (e.g. CD player output) - at least once removed from the live event - but anyway all the rest of the system has to play with. It seems to me that if anything is different, in any way, from the direct connection, it is an artifact and not true to the source. I won't argue that some, many may prefer the sound of those artifacts, and they are perfectly right to choose according to their ears and preferences, what I don't think can be argue logically is that any active preamp, no matter how expensive, can be as "true to the source" as the Lightspeed Attenuator (assuming proper gain and impedance matches). There may a difference in preferance based on accurate versus pleasant, and we are all free to choose the camp that makes most sense to us, and that choice can't really be argued with. I would though argue that a neutral preamp can be mixed with the widest range of sources and amps, which are then left to present their own sonic signatures. |
Anthony, if I read Ralph right, "Not to mention we haven't even discussed cables and as Ralph Karsten so often states, the coloration/artifact added by cables also has to be taken into account." what he has been saying, and given the fact that he makes and sells activ e tube linestages, I seem to hear him say that the reason for an active is to control the ICs, and that is the basic reason for an active, it's buffering of source-pre-cable-amp. Suggesting a preamp makes for a more universal tool in more systems, but that when the total capacitance is dealt with a passive is about as good as it gets, absent the need or desire for colorations of tone or "space". |
Is it the case that one a digital volume control is fully open, no attenuation, there is no loss in resolution? That was my understanding, but I am not technically proficient. |
I would think so, as in essence a fully open ouput with a variable output CD player would be the same (I think)as a regular CD player with a fixed output and you would be controlling volume with a superior attenuator than what is built into the CD/DAC. That is what I think, but I would rather have someone more technical pipe in. |
George, the "passive" "active" debate seems to me more problematic the the tube versus SS debate, for in the latter, there remains room for both to coexist. The passive argument, if right, threatens manufacturers of active preamps, reviewers and magazines supported by advertising from makers of active preamps, and also threatens owners of active preamps that have invested in them and might feel compelled to justify the expense of the gear and protect it from dimishment of the value of their asset. Not to say that there are not systems that need an active to perform well, and I think that is covered here pretty well.
In a review of the Wytech Opal in Positive Feedback, the reviwer said:
Something very interesting goes on when a preamp handles a low-level signal (or not so low in the case of CD). In theory, a preamp should be unnecessary when the source is capable of 2 volts (standard maximum output for a CD player), but experience has shown me that doing without an active preamp does not lead to improved sound. One possible explanation for this is that most CD players have relatively weak output stages. In most cases, they consist of a few op amps and/or some discrete transistors, driven by a power supply that can barely be deemed adequate by high-end audio standards. For the purpose of driving an amp, most are inadequate, and the result is often a bit harsh and/or harmonically "bleached." There is resolution but not refinement, suggesting a system under stress at musical peaks. Also, the sound often lacks dynamics. Many internet contributors claim that this is the sound that was actually recorded, and that if you don't like an aggressive, flat soundstage and lifeless dynamics, you simply can't handle the truth. Some even conclude that an active preamp, which can provide effortless dynamics, a deep, wide soundstage, and palpable, 3-D imaging, is in fact generating artifacts or "enhancements" that are not on the recording. I don't believe that these effects are artifacts, but information that is lost when those recordings are played on lesser systems. Making classical recordings in a real space has led me to believe that these spacial characteristics are real, and can be either captured or added in the mix.
Another argument for eliminating an active line stage is it does not in fact amplify anything, but acts "merely" as an attenuator 90 percent of the time. While it is true that the input is often of a higher voltage than the output, an active preamp also gives the signal a deep reservoir of current drive and voltage stability from its own power supply. Think for a moment about how a preamp works. First, the signal from the source arrives and is attenuated, then the signal is amplified again—replicated, if you will—by a circuit that has a larger and more stable power reserve than the original source. Since the gain of most preamps is fixed, the active part of the line stage is always amplifying the signal, not attenuating it. Since it is only the amount of signal to be amplified from the volume attenuator that changes, the concept that an active line stage is only attenuating the signal is false. In fact, the preamp first reduces the incoming signal, then beefs it back up with (ideally) the same amount of information, but greater drive and control."
What do you think of that? I think my EMM Labs must have a pretty good power supply....
" |
I think this is beyond the reach of logic, it is simply a matter of trying it within the system context as you proscribe and listening for yourself. With all the preamps I have tried (most $5,000+ tube preamps)I've concluded that most negative comment about passives (and resistor versus TVC/AVC for that matter) must come from those with a financial interest (as makers or owners of active preamps), or simply not evaluated in the right system context, or one simply likes euphonic colorations - and they have every right to prefer that. In the wrong system context, it would be like proclaiming the weakness of low watt SETs by evaluating them with a pair of Thiel or B&W speakers, a meaningless assessment of what SETs can do. |
I like the idea of blind listening sessions, why are so many audiophiles and reviewers agaisnt it, or at least to believe in it as a effective method for assessment? That always seemed odd to me. Yes, it would be a good idea to do such a test absent the knowledge of when one is listening to a particular piece, epsecially when they have invested themselves in a piece financially and/or emotionally. I don't know if the LSA is the best preamp, which doesn't exist, but I pretty happy knowing that for $450 I was able to sell my active preamp that was $7,000 more without any obvious sense that is not as good (enjoyable). That can make anyone a devotee on the basis of value alone. |
One thing that would be nice in the LSA, and most modern preamps, though it might "ruinous" or a least "deleterious", is a scheme for balance control to account for recodring mixes, room geometry, and human frailty as we age - not sure how many ears are balanced L/R- perhaps than we would like. I think HP once said not having a balance control was a fatal design flaw - yet one that is very, very common in purist designs. |
I should have thought about that, take that over remote cotrol any day. |
Owned the Ars Sonum (twice:)) Most recently I have owned CAT SL1 Ultimate, Lamm LL2, ARC LS25, Dodd Battery, Joule LA 150MKII Signature Edition, Placette Active Linestage and RVC, K&K TVC, and the BENT TAP AVC. Of that batch, the Joule was my favourite, but sold it after a month or so with the LSA, just did not make sense to me to keep it, in my system with an EMM Labs front end (switchable 2v and 3.6v output), the LSA played on par or better to those, though I only had the Joule at the same time. I never compared it with the Atma preamp I own becuase I use it exclusively with the Atma-amps. The LSA is used with my single ended Music Reference amps. If I were to make a sane recommendation for Merlin owners, it would be to get the Ars Sonum, and "stop worrying about it":) Not that is was the best, but it is good enough to get off the equipment merry-go-round. |
Maybe it was previously mentioned, but can you make these with two volume knobs for left and right channels to adjust balance? |
If I knew that was an option and the $$$ difference was marginal, I wold have gone for that - always good to control balance to deal with unbalanced recordings, rooms, and occassionaly speakers. |
|
I've used that method from time to time:) |
How does the atmosphere, no pun intended, and rooms compare at CES versus RMAF? RMAF is on of the best audio shows I have been to -- I use to go to the COMDEX shows in the old days, would not want to go through that again:) |
Has anyone compared the $14,000 Music First TVC with the $450 LSA? I have to imagine that price difference has nothing whatesover to do with sound quality. |
That is quite a nice write up on the NAT on 6moons - it would be very interesting to hear your opinions of such a "robust" and expensive preamp up against the "simple" LSA. |
That is a great quote Anthony, a great way to define good equipment - a lot simpler than audiophile jargon. |
I have no doubt the LSA is truer to the source than any acrtive linestage. Whether being true to the source sounds better or not to a particular listener is another question that nobody but the listener can answer. What I think the LSA offers, is the ability to eliminate a step in the chain, so that you are left with source,amp, speaker to define the system's sound - it simply gets out of the way, and the source - amp - speaker interface is free to define the sound, without the the preamp acting as a chameleon with differtent systems, the LSA simply gets out of the way, better than any other preamp I have tried, and that makes it transparent on not a coloration to be played with in the system as a whole. Because it is so transparent, or absent, it will alter the choice one might make between source and amp - but for what it is designed to do, it seems to me it does it extemely well. You want warmth, change your amp - the LSA does nothing but make the music louder or lower - don't expect it to flavour the soundscape in any way - it won't do that - it is the color of water. |
Interesting article by Robert Harley in the 2011 Buyer's Guide (TAS) on audio vocabulary - including "fowardness" and "laid back".
What I find with the LSA is that soundstage and imaging changes with the recordings - that to me is a good sign.
One thing for sure, there is simply no arguing preferences, unless you really want to start a winless argument.
What is not arguable in my view is that the LSA provides a very high level of sound quality at a very low price point (for the hobby).
Glad to see that some folks are giving the LSA a try. |
George, that is what I thought but being an E.E. ingnoramus I did not feel comfortable making that claim, or the my EMM Labs CDP seems to have a pretty well built power supply. I think that whatever it is that some prefer with active linestages (even when impedance matching, current, and gain is not a problem), and they have every right to feel that way, it is not something actually in the recording, but a distortion that might "feel" truer to some, but cannot be truer to the source in fact.
The argument of passive versus active may be as unwinnable (and it does not have to be "won") as the old SS/tubes argument, what I feel pretty comfortable saying however, is that in a well matched source, cable, amp environment, the LSA is the best passive volume control I have had in my system after trying all the major alternatives. In a different system setup than what I have, I might prefer a unity gain with buffer, or an active tube linestage. |
Why there will never be a best preamp ever:) |
Ah! A good music recommendation, I will get that.
I never compared the Atma-sphere preamp with the LSA as I use it with the Atma amps in all balanced connection, so I jave not been able to compare them with the same amp.
I use the LSA with the Music Reference RM10 (summer) and RM 9 Special Edition (Fall), both amps single-ended. I went through a series of preamps, most recently the CAT SL1 Ultimate, Lamm LL2, and Joule LA150 Signature Edition. Of these, the Joule was the one I liked most and could live with it forever, but I decided to try the LSA just to see what it might do versus one of the best sounding active tube linestages I have owned. I kep going back and forth for a few months, and without too much analysis, I simply felt I liked the LSA better, certainly as much as the $7,000 Joule - seemed silly to keep both with that kind of price differential and since I only have one source, low capacitance cable (Cardas GR), and both MR amps were designed by Roger Modjeski speciofcally to be passive friendly (High input impedance, high sensitvity <1v) I figured that while an active will sound better with a wide range of sources, amps, and speakers, my particular system is really passive optimized and that under those circumstances a passive should be better at passing the signal undamged from source to amp.
The LSA is very, very quiet, seems to be very well balanced from lows to highs, has a very wide and deep sounstage with recordings that have wide and deep sounstages - soundstaging with this preamp really is a reflection of the recording and not a constant attribute, and imgaging and localization is very precise and unwavering, and instruments seem to have their naturural size and instrumental bloom. I also notice that music can be played louder without unpleasant shout that can occur with some systems.
Within my system, there is really a hairsplitting comparison with the CAT, Lamm, and Joule - they are all exceptional pieces of equipment and enjoyed all of them. There is not however a hairsplitting difference in price - which is why I love the LSA, it can give audiophiles without deep pockets SOTA sound if they pick their sources, cables, and amps carefully/properly. Or, if you have the money, you can buy one of these great linestages and have a great system too, without worrying much about system matching.
Arthur Salvatore says that if your system sounds better with an active linestage, your system needs an active linestage - but if you don't need one, a passive is the way to go. I think this in part explains why some folks swear by passives, and others say they much prefer actives; I suspect where you fall depends on your system as a whole, and not necessarily a reflection the inherent qualities of either approach - why as they say wisely, your milage may vary. |
Non-audiophiles would laugh at 99% of what is said here, there view is not the gold standard for judging the argument here.
I understand that CDPs are not meant to play directly into amps as you would have to add the expense of volume control, but I'm not sure what electrical deficiency there might be in terms of voltage or impedance (my CDP puts out 2v or 3.6v with 200ohm output impedance)issues driving amps - not sure I understand the argument that the Bolero test is not in fact the gold standard for establishing what a source actually sounds like, nor why judging the transaparency of a passive against the direct connection is not fair test of whether or not the passive is transparent to the source, sure it has ciruitry, but 1% of what you would find in any active. This in no way says that folks won't prefer a coloration pf the source signal to a transpatent view - no argument there.
That Atma-combo is the best pre/amp combo for driving my Merlins, but I cannot deal with the heat in the summer. I can compare the Atma pair to my other gear, but I cannot isolate the LSA compared to the Atma pre, I simply think I would prefer the OTL amp to other amps no matter what quality preamp I was using.
That being said, the LSA/Music Reference RM10 is about as good as it gets for $2,400 new as long as 35 watts is enough. |
"the Lightspeed's simulated output impedance varies from about 37 Ohms to about 14.6 kOhms"... Does the output impedance go down as the volume goes up? |
I don't think there is any confusion about why "Bolero" is a recommended piece for trying a direct connection between CDP and amp.
Not sure I've hear an argument yet as to why a direct connection is not "the" standard for assessing the sound of a recording from a particular CDP as a source, to me it seems absolutely is the standard of what a recording sounds like unadulerate and uncolored by the use of a preamplifier; the LSA is about as close to that as you can get, and an active preamp, which one might prefer, in nevertheless an additive coloration not found in the source signal. |
As George said June 14th, "The best sound you will get is to put your (CD DAC or Phono) directly into your power amps with a VERY quite CD track first, this is the most perfect "true to the source" sound you will get, and only the Lightspeed Attenuator is closest pre or passive to mimicking that sound." This description suggest the direct connection, where Bolero is simply used to keep from blowing out your speakers, and it appears to be George's view the standard for the most accurate transmission of the source signal to an amp (not a level test) - and in this case there is no impedance mismatch; I agree with Dgarretson that when there is and impedance mismatch, a buffered passive (or active) will likely perform better - As George has susggested and Arthur Salvatore and Roger Modjeski of Music Reference both said - but with good impedance matches the buffer option will not be as pure/good as truly passive. I do wish I had a Pass B1 to test in the system.
I don't think I will run the LSA with the Atma-amps no matter the season for they are designed to run with balanced connections, and they are not very sensitive - some gain in the preamp is needed. The LSA has made my Music Reference amps sound their best (the RM9 SE I preferred to my CAT JL2), but I still prefer the Atma amp cuz I don't think you can beat OTLs if your speakers work well with them - mine do.
Dream preamp - active tube line stage with low output impedance and variable gain settings, switchable to unity gain tube buffered output, or purely resistor passive - the LSA as volume control of course. Hmmm. I bet Modjeski could build one.... |
The "Heather Test" has entered the lexicon, and I suspect well all do it:) Now, where did I put the Chianti....? |
Grannyring, "it is the recording my preamp has more fidelity to" - more fidelity than the LSA in your system? -- that is very possible. What seems impossible is that an active linestage could have more fidelity to the recording than a direct connection (with no impedance mismatches, and no ICs), I suspect that in your system, for some reason, you would hear a difference between the direct connection and the LSA connection because something is just not matching right - now, if it sounds the same then I just don't see how your preamp is truer to the recording; though I believe that Van Morrison live, in a large space, and amplified through a sound system is going to sound quite different than a studio recording or even a live feed from a live performance. The important thing is you have a preamp that you love and makes you happy; what it is all about. |
I must say that when I come home after listening to a live jazz concert, natural acoustic, unamplified, I realize that if I had a $1,000,000 system, with a perfect room, and and 24/96 digital recordings, it would still never sound like real instruments in a real venue - in some ways it might even sound better, or be more pleasurable at home, but it never really feels like the real thing to me - but that is OK with me, I'm not going to find Coltrane or Mingus at the club down the road either. |
Well one thing for sure GR, you have the best amps in the world:) Do you use Speltz autoformers with the Sound Labs? For some reason, I'm not tempted to use the LSA with the Atma-sphere (M60s). |
I'll think about it, sounds like fun. Now, back to our regularly scheduled program..... |
That's what it sounded like to me. It seems that light loading is effective at dealing with speakers that have hard loads for tube amp and it improves the situation - with the Merlins and Audiokinesis Jazz I suspect the extra power of the 8 ohm tap is the better option.
To get back to the subject, I would strongly recommend that all Music Reference RM9 and 10 owners try the LSA if they have a single source setup (actually any tube amp owner with sensitive 1v amps and 100 kohm input impedance). Is it just a coincidence that 3 of the LSA users also have a Music Reference RM10? Or is it just a match made in heaven for $2,500 MSRP? |
Wilsynet, I'm glad you gave it a try. By the way, Clio9 is also using the LSA with the RM10MKII. Not sure if this is the reason why, but one reason I felt the compulsion to try a passive was the Roger Modjeski (Music Reference)told me to use a passive, that no active could be better; though he was willing to build me a more traditional tube-buffered with or without gain. Well, you know Roger can buiild anything, and he loves selling tubes, yet this fella who knows a thing or two about audio insisted to go with a passive. Then I read Arthur Salvatore's comments on passive versus active. Well, I had to go about testing the concept and have had Placette, Goldpoint, BENT TVC and AVC, and Roger's Pot-in-a-Box - they all sounded excellent, these were not gradations of crap to great, they were all at least very good, and at the end of that path I came to the LSA which was the best of the lot IMHO and I'll say that in my system with ideal[?] impedance matches and ICs the LSA is the best passive preamp I have heard, and I suspect if your system well suited toward the passive approach the LSA will give you SOTA sound quality for $450 which is a good thing to know, especially if finance are an issue, combined with the RM10MKII I think that is just about as good as it gets IF 35 watts is enough power for your speakers, room, listening volume. |
Kevin, what preamp will the LS be replacing or compared to? The Art Audio doesn't have volume control, does it? |
I would say the RM10 is quite neutral and fast with the LSA, as described in the 6moons review. But, use it with a 6sn7 based active preamp, and use RCA 6sn7s and you might have a "tubier" flavor, but the amp itself seems neutral, with tube bloom and soundstaging that only tubes seems to do compared with even the best SS. The RM9 with EL34s is a slightly darker flavor, but I think Roger has always designed with neutrality in ,ind and nothing overtly tubey in the CJ/Cary vain. I am always amazed by the RM10. I wonder what the mono setup wpould sound like - I suspect Roger would say the stereo version is better if you don't need the extra power (35 versus 70 watts). |
Wilsynet, I agree with everything you just said, and the Merlins, like the Zus are very benign loads, and efficient enough for 35 watts. I think, not always sure, that my preferred system is the all Atma-sphere rig, but the LSA with my RM10s and RM9 SEs, are might fine, can't really get myself to sell any of them. In my system, I preferred the Atma M60s and MR RM9 Special Editions to my CAT JL2s which I thought were just about as good as amps could be, certainly the CATs can handle a wider array of speaker loads than the Atma-sphere, but those RM9 SEs put out 162 watts into 8 Ohm and 200 into 4ohms, that is alot of tube power - if I could only own one amp for all seasons it would proabably be the RM9 (with my LSA). |
Do you think the 12ohm nominal benefits you with light loading because you lose less power output? I think your "light loading" with the 8 ohm tap with your speakers. |
I've light loaded the RM10s and RM9s and prefer the 8 ohm tpa with the Merlins - in part, this must be because the VSMs are not speakers seaking more damping from the amp, so it might be very speaker dependent. There is a thread on Audio Circle like you mention. Might be an interesting question as a separate thread, that is the whole light loading approach with amps that have differrent rated taps. |
But there is no output impedance optimization based on dial position 10-12-2 o'clock - is that right? Some attentuators seem to have optimal positions in that sense. |
Kevin, I can't imagine you would not prefer the LSA over the passive built into the Aero, but of course you won't be listening to the Aero transport/dac either. Knghifi, we await your full assessment when you have had some time....hope you are not dissapointed. |
Knghifi, glad you found the LSA a good listen. There is something that a good tube preamp does that is very enjoyable indeed, and the VACs being some of the finest. I went back and forth quite a while with my Joule 150 Signature Edition (which is supberb)but for my taste, I enjoyed the LSA every bit as much, so for the price difference I could not justify keeping the Joule, given that I have the Atma-sphere combo for cooler months. The LSA/RM10 I will use in the hot and humid Baltimore summers. I guess what I'll say for now, is that the LSA/RM10 combo is a killer pre/amp combo for less than $2,500 where 35 watts is enough power. If I were an audiophile on a limited budget it would be my number one choice, and with the right speakers maybe where budget is no limit too. |
Specs for TRL? Like asking Rolls Royce for horespower data and getting "sufficient" as a response. Just kidding, but their site offers very little information beyond price. |
Since I asked the question in terms of absolutes (Best)I repeat what I said early on - it is silly to speak of any piece of gear that way, and there are obviously many (some?) world-class line stages out there some which you or may not prefer to the LSA - why there isn't only one product on the market afterall. I now wish I had names this, LSA, Best Sound per $$$ Ever? - I think there would be much debate about that. The only problem is I don't think it is fair to make reference to it simply in terms of value for $$$, it does it a disservice to couch it that way - it is simply a very, very fine linestage that will suprisingly compete, and for some, surpass, many highly regarded linestages regardless of cost. In other words, worth auditioning no matter what you circumstances, and a must audition if you have limeted funds. |
I wish I would check my spelling. Of course I meant to say "I think there would NOT be much debate about that" |
