Any thoughts on removing a preamp from your system

I do it all the time when reviewing various pieces; results vary widely. If you can do so, try it. But there is no universal acceptance, nor performance guarantee when doing it.

Hi Phusis, Iike your analysis.

Yesterday I returned my Fosgate Phono amp to my VTL 5.5 preamp, and immediately noticed a lost in dynamics and transparency. Needless to say I switched back to the direct connection of my phono amp to my Audio Mirror power amp. The Audio Mirrors have pots.

I realize these results maybe due to "total" system synergy, which is why I am not throwing out my preamp just yet.

I have two other source components (Marantz SACD, and a solid state battery operated option PATHOS Phono amp), which I plan to test tonight.

Herb

My experience equals others in this thread. I would not say I have given up on "resolution", but for me also, "musicality" is even more central. Last year, I tested the Aesthetix Io phono stage direct and through preamps so much that I started to hate it. Why? Because the direct connection is indeed excellent, has outstanding clarity, and so on! It was only after awhile that I starting missing something. Gradually I learned what to listen for. Like a bit washed out sound. Big dynamics, but not timing. A friend summed it up: your speaker drivers aren't controlled in the right way. I recently managed to get a used Einstein The Tube Mk2 preamp for a fair price (here in Europe). It gives me much of what I was missing. Indeed, since it came into my system, I have not bothered with more of the tiresome with/without preamp testing. It just feels right.

For the same reason Phusis, that's why I called my product the "Lightspeed Attenuator", as it's a passive attenuator, as there is no preamplifying going on inside it.

Cheers George

Mapman --

YEs, but the question is, why?

I can see how the proper eletronic mating might be trickier with a passive, but I cant see a disadvantage if done right, other than that various active pres might provide more flavors of sound to please more people. Not everyone likes vanilla best.

My thoughts as well. I'd wager most active preamps are inherently limited by a lack of transparency, or certainly an added sense of character, an issue that is revealed the more obviously when compared to a successful poweramp to DAC direct-coupling or a similarly well-integrated passive preamp, and of course also relative to the active preamp used. Moreover, where the synergy of a setup is "dialed in" around the use of an active preamp and its negation results in the overall sound falling by the wayside, so to speak, this is not necessarily indicative of the preamp's merits but could as well point to its colorations and/or a less than ideal in-/output impedance match in its stead.

To those considering skipping both an active and passive preamp, and go DAC/poweramp-direct: Digital volume controls in the 24-bit domain (or higher), preferably dithered and where the source is PC-based, are a brilliant solution. In practicality their use, even down to some -40dB attenuation, seem not to impede in any way noticable to my ear (going by JRiver MC19's volume control), and with the typical poweramp gain level and speaker sensitivity most would likely use digital volume leveling in the -10 to -25dB range, which is more or less inside the (theoretically) safe confines before bit stripping/truncation is said to occur. However, even outside this spectrum (i.e.: above ~-25dB ) I can't to the best of my hearing abilities hear any signal degradation with "normal" listening levels, or even lower, which in my case is typically an average ~65-75dB (measured via iPhone SPLnFFT v4.4 noise meter. Put more faith in thy ears than mere numbers and theoretical deductions..