Placette RVC vs. Adcom GFP-750 in passive mode

Has anyone done an a/b comparison between these two units?
The Adcom does a nice job in passive mode, but I'm curious if the Placette is better, and why?
Your comments are appreciated!
I haven't done the comparison but read the Placette Web site. I have owned Placette preamps & compared it to the best out there. It is by far one of the biggest bargains in high end audio. Guy is great & builds an amazing product. It is a purist approach which the Adcom isn't. The Placette is 100% transparent. The Adcom is an all together different unit & shouldn't be compared as such. If you want strictly a passive buy the Placette. If not then buy the Placette Active but it will cost.
I own the Placette passive. It bested my First Sound;-- Actually I get more/better bass.(than)-- Anybody know if this Adcom sounds better using passive than active??
IMHO - the passive mode on the Adcom IS better than the active mode. It allows more detail, without coloration, to come through.
Hey....still looking for folks that can COMPARE the two units operating in passive.
Somebody make me a really good deal on one and I'll buy it, or just let me borrow YOURS for a couple of days! :-) Or....come to Memphis and bring your Placette and we'll see first hand!
Good Listening!
Placette offers a 30 day money back guarantee; so it will cost you almost nothing ( is small and light) to try it.

i have used the Placette as my reference for 4 years and it has bettered all comers in my system (until the brand new $23K darTZeel pre showed up 2 weeks ago).

if you want a pre that is more 'not there' than any other look no further than the Placette.

OTOH make sure that you understand the requirements that passive has to function correctly in your system;

1. short interconnects from pre to amps
2. high input impedence with your amp (around 40k ohms)
3. low output impedence from your sources and sufficient output signal strength from sources.

some systems (or personal tastes) need the additional 'something' that ALMOST all active pre's contribute. if you happen to have a system that needs 'nothing'......the Placette could be for you.

if you have a record that is recorded at a very low level and can input the interconnect DIRECTLY into your amp without overloading your amps or your ears....THAT is how the Placette will sound. it will be difficult to find a CD sufficiently low level for this test. if you don't like the sound of your source input directly into your amps, you need an active pre. if you are not sure about the signal level of this experiment then don't try it.....a high volume direct line level signal into your amps can blow things up.

the Adcom is not in the class of the Placette as far as circut design and parts quality. volume attenuation is a very 'parts quality' sensitive thing. the Vishay resistors that Placette uses are very expensive and you can hear it (or rather 'not' hear it). your placette active or passive?what does the daTZeel do better?i am using placette rvc now,am looking for placette active.owned gfp-750 in the past,as well as c-j prem 16lsmk11,placette was more transparent than both.any thoughts on why placette active would be better than the passive.i am looking for cleaner bass out of vandersteen 5's.thanks for input.
I have owned the Placette Active Line Stage for about 4 years now and before that, had the Adcom GFP-750 that I used in passive mode. I can assure you that the Placette is far and away better than the Adcom GFP-750 in passive mode - much more detail, spaciousness and tighter, more refined bass. My guess is that the Placette's Vishay resistor volume attenuator scheme is much more transparent than the Adcom's rotary control. Do yourself a favor and get the Placette. To address Machine's query: The Placette Active Line Stage is not really active in the conventional sense - it has no gain. It is "active" because it employs active parts to buffer the inputs and output. The buffering allows for a better impedance match to other components that are connected to the unit. This results in an easy load, as seen by the source components and interconnects.
my Placette RVC is passive. i have not tried the Placette active pre; Guy Hummel (Mr. Placette) says that his active sounds better than his passive.

why might the active be better? i would guess that many/most systems can benefit from some advantages to active. most systems do not have ideal impedence situations, cable lengths, or the natural tonal balance, dynmaics and weight that an active pre can bring. OTOH if a system is just right in these areas an active pre will 'get in the way' of the musicial message 'to some degree'.

can all systems benefit from active? maybe the 'right' active. until i try a Placette active i'm just guessing here.

read my last few posts on my system thread by clicking on 'system' next to my name below for what i think the darTZeel does better than the Placette (and everything else i've tried).
Thanks for everyones comments!
Happy Listening!
I guess I got lucky and my pieces just all seem to work together. A friend who bought my speakers (Merlin;MM's) just bought the Adcom.((Ok, I got all his money!!)) I tried to steer him to the Placette. He lives to far away to know if his "pieces" would be ideal/or not. I just remembered the review said it was quite good for the money.Then I couldn't remember what mode they thought was best. My friend is a beginer,so he's happy. At this point I think he is unsure of active/passive quality. Never having owned this Adcom,I couldn't help to much. (Is part of why I entered this thread)--(Owning the Placett,being the other part) I actually sent him my Arcam 27 as a loaner as he had nothing else even half decent to use for cds.