Tisbury Audio Mini Passive Pre-amp

[Macca]

I've been meaning to try a passive pre for years - I borrowed the Tilbury off of Jerry JANDL (thanks Jerry) and have to say it is a bit of a revelation. You get to a point with your system where you are just trying to lift veils, most of them gossamer-thin. This is like lifting a pillowcase off the sound. I've been listening quite carefully to see if there is a lack of bass and drive which are the downsides of using a passive - maybe there is a tiny bit but the gains in every other area far outweigh it. Absolute clarity and sweeteness of sound, individual tracks in the mix are clearly defined and real texture to the instruments. That 'digital glare' that has bugged me as long as I have had a CD player is gone, plus some mush I didn't even realise was there until it disappeared. If you are using an all digital set up I would strongly urge trying a passive pre if you have not done so already.

[wee tee cee]

I've been meaning to try a passive pre for years - I borrowed the Tilbury off of Jerry JANDL (thanks Jerry) and have to say it is a bit of a revelation. You get to a point with your system where you are just trying to lift veils, most of them gossamer-thin. This is like lifting a pillowcase off the sound. I've been listening quite carefully to see if there is a lack of bass and drive which are the downsides of using a passive - maybe there is a tiny bit but the gains in every other area far outweigh it. Absolute clarity and sweeteness of sound, individual tracks in the mix are clearly defined and real texture to the instruments. That 'digital glare' that has bugged me as long as I have had a CD player is gone, plus some mush I didn't even realise was there until it disappeared. If you are using an all digital set up I would strongly urge trying a passive pre if you have not done so already.

my experience reflects yours, i hadn't realised my previous active pre was having such a negative impact....great pre regardless of price
cant help chaps with a record player could add a seperate phono stage and ask tisbury to configure the pre accordingly they charged me a tenner for different configuration.

[realysm42]

So what about no pre, would that be better yet?

Is be really interested for someone to give it a go, especially in the digital realm.

This is what I'm doing but (and its a big but) I've got new speakers and and amp, so I can hardly be subjective; yes it sounds better than it ever has done, but is this due to the new gear, how much can be put forward to having no pre in the chain?

Flipping it on its head, how can adding more wires and boss be good for the sound?

[Macca]

A passive pre is just a potentiometer in a box so it is effectively the same as having no pre in the chain. You could plug a DAC or CD player with variable output straight into a power amp but the variable output on these things is just a pot anyway so I don't see there being much difference.

I do want to listen to my vinyl as well so that is a hurdle to be overcome somehow if I stick with the passive option.

[realysm42]

That's what I was thinking; I run my DAC straight into my power amp.

The only problem and genuine threat is that everything on my PC has separate volumes, which I initially forgot and nearly destroyed an old set of speakers

[Macca]

That's what I was thinking; I run my DAC straight into my power amp.

:

Then you are already reaping the benefits that I have only just discovered

Richard Dunn on his site was talking recently about the difference between systems that produce musical instruments realistically and those that are effectively a refined P.A. That struck a chord with me as that is really what my system sounded like - a good, small scale P.A and it had occurred to me that was possibly the cause of the underlying dissatisfaction I have had for a long time. Trying this passive has opened my eyes a bit, I know he is a strong proponent of the passive pre approach, and it seems to me that he is onto something there. (Although I am sure he knew that already ).

[realysm42]

I might not bother with the whole preamp thing in that case.

I'm glad you've found another, higher level of fidelity!

Keeping it simple really can reap benefits sometimes, that's one of my main reasons for going pure digital; do one thing as well as I can, instead of a tonnes of sources averagely.

[Macca]

I might not bother with the whole preamp thing in that case.

.

lol - there is a lot of bollocks talked on that site but there is the occasional gem of wisdom from the man himself when they do get around to discussing hi-fi

[jandl100]

A passive pre is just a potentiometer in a box so it is effectively the same as having no pre in the chain.

Umm, no, I don't think I agree with that.

There are pots and then there are pots. I've tried quite a few passive pre-amps in my time, and the Tizzie is one of the best. Some are pretty grotty, tbh, with at worst a murky uninvolving sound and I'd expect that sort of performance from a random pot stuck in a CD player.

Get a good passive pre, like the Tisbury.

[Macca]

Don't get me wrong Jerry, obviously the quality of the pot used is going to make a difference. My point was there is no other gubbins involved to add noise or distortion, as a powered pre-amp might do.