Music Reference RM9 and Preamp Experiences

I've got a Music Reference RM5III and I find the phono stage is considerably more transparent than the line stage. It's line stage has great balance and musicality, but it's not the last word in transparency in my system. The phono stage however, is a real winner within the limits of it's 36db of gain. Of course, it's possible the RM5 mates in a more synergistic manner with Music Reference amps (and others) than it has with those amps I've used it with. As to Rogers insistence no preamp is the equal of a passive, I'd say that Roger has some closely held beliefs that seem to be primarily rooted in engineering logic rather than listening. Nothing wrong with that, it's just that most of us know engineering logic isn't always a guaranteed path beautiful sound. Audio reviews in print and on the web are replete with numerous tales of those who tried to follow the path to audio nirvana through the use of passive preamps and eventually found them unsatisfactory. For the modest outlay, the "pot in a box" isn't a big gamble to try though.

As I've gone down this path and spent countless hours (and $$$) listening I've slowly come to the conclusion that engineering logic like that exhibited by the likes of Roger Modjeski and Jack Elliano are right.

The idea of if it measures good it sounds good has some merit to it.

Of course we all hear differently and have our preferences so that's why our hobby and the industry that caters to it exists.

BTW - I own an RM-10 and Lightspeed and I have to say this combination is difficult to beat at it's price point and then some.

It too have been on the passive-active-passive joy ride, so I know what you mean about the audio nirvana path. That is why I was especially careful and attentive going back and forth with the Lightspeed and Joule LA150 Signature. Both are great preamps (at $450 versus $6,500 that should be enough to choose the LS) but regardless of cost, I preferred the Lightspeed - a matter of taste and system context no doubt. I use it with my RM10 and RM9 Special Edition. Is it the best? Heck I don't know. I only know that it is very, very good and at $450 stupidgood (my favourite word from Bobby P at Merlin).

I do also hear - no pun intended - the listening and engineeering dichotomy. I can only say that having heard several Music Reference amps (RM10,9,9SE, 200, and 200 wired in Class A and triode)that while Roger certainly knows his way around a test bench, the quality sound of his amps suggests that he either does listen, or if he doesn't listen, it may in fact not be relevant to do so (I think he listens)and that he does not lose that skill of producing good sound with the challenges presented in designing a preamp.

None of this means that I could tell anyone whether they would prefer a high-quality tube line stage or a passive - I know I can't - but the Lightspeed produces some of the very best sound I have had over the past 30 years where I've tried scores of some of the very best preamps and amps on the market. If money is any issue at all, the LS, with proper impedance matches between source-pre-amp (gain should be no issue with most sources) is a low-cost option for SOTA sound that for some might be as good or better than anything else you might buy.

I've been at Roger's place a couple tines and know he does listen. I think like most his designs have a house sound. I also know he spends a lot of time measuring, specifically for distortion and hum. He is probably one of the few designers who publishes the hum measurements for his amps.

I know one thing, the RM-10 is one quiet amp, more so than my S-30 and Auricle Musicblocs. It is probably the quietest amp I've had in my system since my solid state TRL D-225.

Roger sounds alot like John Dunlavy - makers of fine products that measure well, both degreed electrical engineers, and both myth busters regarding audio vodoo and pixie dust - I don't think either view wire, capacitors, transformers, resistors as totems imbuing equipment with "magic" (and we all do look for that magic).