new experience with my passive preamp

Promised to relay my recent acquisition experience of the passive
pre-amp as opposed to my active beaut.
Well, after four or five hours of listening, the benefits
of the Placette remote volume control is clearly audible.
My system: Lamm amps, Avantegarde Duo speakers, Mark
Levinson 390S processor. Replaced the Lamm DL11, deluxe.
Note well: the AV Duos are very sensitive and the bottom
end may still be too loud unless a mod is added to lower
the volume.
With an output impedance of 10 ohms and max output of 2.225 volts, the Levinson 390S looks like a perfect source for a passive preamp. What ICs are you using?

Some owners say the Placette is soft in the low end. What's your experience?

How are the dynamics?
Using LAT International IC's. Re low end, the Avantgardes
have so much bass, no loss is noted or ever a problem.
Transparency, dynamics, music engagement clearly depend
solely on the source material. Poor CD's are clearly
revealed. Here "Garbage in, garbage out" is so obvious.
How does the Placette compare to your Lamm preamp?
The Placette is hard to characterize in the usual
review gargon. It is open, fresh, engaging, clear,
and,yes, transparent. The Lamm is very similar, easy
to use and listen to. For balance the Lamm has two
volume controls, should we need boost unilaterally.
Only three inputs on the Placette, barely enough:
CD, phono and tuner. No tape loop. But what is there
is clear, the best. No need for balance control so far.
If needed, told it is an add-on available. No frills.
No extras. But what is here is honest, useful, musical.
FWIW, Friends, I found that a balance control settles the
mind. Where some music is predominently heavy to one side,
it is comforting to be able to adjust/re-evaluate and
judge for myself what sounds best. Aging tubes, different
wire, new components may require a shift in control.
Not having that option is just silly! It may end up
tipping the scale between pre-amp purchases. Just like
to have or have not a remote. So I got it added. BG
According to very many passive linestage aficionados the Placette is the best.

But according to Placette their active unit is better than the passive.
Having owned both the Placette passive and active, I can verify both of Paul's points.
The reason the Placette Passive is hard to "characterize" is that It has no "character." That's the beauty of the piece: It's transparency(added and subtracting nothing/doing no harm). It just lets exactly what emanates from your source(good or bad) to pass to the rest of the system with ONLY a change in the volume. The one reason I sold mine was my bi-amped system couldn't play loud enough with some of the un-compressed recordings I love. I'm a realistic SPL freak. The Placette Active unit would probably have satisfied that hunger, but then I wouldn't have made the major paradigm shift that I did: jumping right from a life long straight-wire-with-gain/digital hating/don't-tamper-with-the-signal nut to a TacT RCS 2.2X lover. That didn't even have the gain that I needed until I upgraded the power supply. You're right Mr B: If there is any imbalance at all, anywhere in your system/room/tubes- It will greatly affect imaging, sound stage, etc. A balance control IS a very nice thing to have. Again, YES- The Placette is the Rolls-Royce of passive linestages.
And the Bent TAP the Bentley?