What's the purpose of a preamp?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

Me neither, *unless* that's how the recording in question is meant to sound. All I want is to extract, as faithfully as possible, the musical information embedded onto whatever source material it is I'm listening to, with as little 'signature' as possible, of the equipment used, superimposed onto that sound:)

Marco.

---

I'm not interested in that at all. I want to enjoy the music on the record. There are ways to 'faithfully extract' what's on the recording - every detail - and still have it sound less than enjoyable.

Not in my experience, *if* that goal has been genuinely achieved. Otherwise, all you've created is some sort of contrived/coloured sound, and that's fundamentally not hi-fi, or indeed what I got into this game for:nono:

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

Your Croft is very good indeed, but I have not preferred it in the 3 times we have baked off now - it's different but not preferable (to me). The ML I have not baked off against but it does the job exactly the way I prefer it done. I don't need to hear it in my own system to be sure of that. Also you can buy the ML which is not the case with your Croft, as isn't really a Croft anymore, is it?

---

Fairy muff, but it's pretty hard to properly judge either the Croft or the ML in an alien system, at a bake-off or otherwise. The only way you can get properly to grips with something is when hearing it your own system, thus judging it against a known reference.

That's all I meant:)

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

Fairy muff, but it's pretty hard to properly judge either the Croft or the ML in an alien system, at a bake-off or otherwise. The only way you can get properly to grips with something is when hearing it your own system, thus judging it against a known reference.

That's all I meant:)

Marco.

---

Yes, I only have comparative assessments to go by, that is true. After 30 years in this game, man and boy, I sort of feel that is enough experience to be able to take a punt with confidence. 'Gut instinct' as you're always saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by montesquieu

I'm not interested in that at all. I want to enjoy the music on the record. There are ways to 'faithfully extract' what's on the recording - every detail - and still have it sound less than enjoyable.

---

If it wasn't for the EAR pre-amp you would have a pretty handy studio system though. I've heard the RFC Canterbury and they are by far the least coloured Tannoy DC I've heard. And the Radford power amp needs no comment. So you've really got 90% of the way their and then just ameliorated it to your personal taste with the pre. IMO exactly the way to do it. Aim for neutral then ameliorate to taste. Getting the presentation exactly how you want it is the real 'Art Of Sound' and it isn't easy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

Yes, I only have comparative assessments to go by, that is true. After 30 years in this game, man and boy, I sort of feel that is enough experience to be able to take a punt with confidence. 'Gut instinct' as you're always saying.

---

No worries, but regardless, it wouldn't do any harm to test your gut instinct in the 'real world', as it were. Whenever I've done that, I've usually found it a rather enlightening experience:)

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

No worries, but regardless, it wouldn't do any harm to test your gut instinct in the 'real world', as it were. Whenever I've done that, I've usually found it a rather enlightening experience:)

Marco.

---

Okay look at the Cranage show we were at the other month. That Welsh blokes system that you really loved? No way I'd have it. Nowt wrong with it just not the sort of presentation I like. I was keen on the Lampizator system, You weren't that much for it. There wasn't any difference in quality between them, but the presentation was quite different. Once you are beyond a certain level of quality it gets down to personal taste, there's no automatic 'best' or 'better'. I think that applies to any component, not just pre-amps.

Yes, I agree on the series type being the one to go for, I have tried all three types over the years, and have stuck with series type Attenuators in both my Solid State, and Valve preamps.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RothwellAudio

The Khozmo stepped attenuators look to be extremely well-engineered, but I would advise anyone considering one to choose carefully. They do three different types of attenuators which they call shunt, ladder and series.

In my opinion the series type is the best. The ladder type is really just the same as the series type but switches resistors unnecessarily which introduces an additional switch contact. The rationale for this type of attenuator is (presumably) that there are fewer resistors in the circuit at any one time, and fewer resistors must be better. No, more resistors is the better option in my opinion because there's less voltage dropped across any one resistor therefore less distortion, and thermal noise is reduced slightly by using more resistors.
The least desirable is the so-called shunt type. This type of attenuator has no merit in my opinion because the input impedance varies wildly with the volume setting and the output impedance is always higher than it needs to be. The rationale for this type of attenuator is that "there's only one resistor in the signal path". Well, no there isn't. It betrays a basic misunderstanding of electronics to believe there is.
Anyone who has tried a "shunt" attenuator passive pre-amp and found it wanting should try again with a series attenuator.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

Okay look at the Cranage show we were at the other month. That Welsh blokes system that you really loved? No way I'd have it. Nowt wrong with it just not the sort of presentation I like. I was keen on the Lampizator system, You weren't that much for it. There wasn't any difference in quality between them, but the presentation was quite different. Once you are beyond a certain level of quality it gets down to personal taste, there's no automatic 'best' or 'better'. I think that applies to any component, not just pre-amps.

---

I *completely* agree. However, that doesn't negate the notion of only being able to judge something properly, after hearing it in the context of your own system.

I mean, I don't know about you, but if the option were available to me before buying any piece of kit, of trying it my system first, then I'd always take it, regardless of any gut instinct I'd formed on it beforehand.

At the end of the day, whatever my gut instincts said, I'd never conclusively judge ANY piece of equipment until, or unless, I'd heard it in my own system, and thus against my current established reference. For me, that's the only way you know for sure what something is doing:)

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

If it wasn't for the EAR pre-amp you would have a pretty handy studio system though. I've heard the RFC Canterbury and they are by far the least coloured Tannoy DC I've heard. And the Radford power amp needs no comment. So you've really got 90% of the way their and then just ameliorated it to your personal taste with the pre. IMO exactly the way to do it. Aim for neutral then ameliorate to taste. Getting the presentation exactly how you want it is the real 'Art Of Sound' and it isn't easy.

---

Interesting comment. Actually the EAR pre has holes for rack mounting ....