Tisbury Audio Mini Passive Pre-amp

[Marco]

Thanks, Alan. Well in that case, the Tisbury certainly doesn't sound harsh either.

Like I said, it's all to do with the circuit stuff is put in and how it's implemented overall, not to mention the hi-fi system in which it's used. Therefore, IMO, it's a mistake to form definitive conclusions on any component or piece of audio equipment, when only having heard it in certain contexts

Marco.

[Ali Tait]

Well having spent years trying all sorts of components in all sorts of gear, I tend to prefer good carbons to metals. I think that qualifies me in having an opinion!

[Marco]

Of course it does, Ali - I never said it didn't. However, that doesn't invalidate my contrary opinion, based on not inconsiderable experience, having lived with and enjoyed metal film resistor-based steppers for years [and not finding them in any way harsh]!

Marco.

[DSJR]

I worry that 'classic' carbon film resistors change in value over many years' use, but whether it's time or stress related I really don't know. Glenn Croft has used metal film resistors in his products for decades now (Holco's in my 4PP's I'm told) and harsh is something they've NEVER EVER been. Sweet certainly (although less, now Glenn told me a few updates to make to it), but never harsh.

Making the chain more transparent to the source *can* show tonal hardness in many speakers, the crossovers of which can go wrong right where our ears are the most sensitive IME. Live acoustic 'brass' can pin you to the wall with natural intensity, but this 'hard hitting' tone isn't the same as electronic harshness. Ali, I'm sorry if I'm going totally off the track.

This afternoon, I was shown the (non-ladder) attenuators NVA use. Beautifully made by the supplier and I have to say the 'feel' is superb, as well as the solid mechanical engineering, which is a plane above the Chinese attenuator I bought for one of my Crown preamps (see the Ken Rockwell review of the IC-150 for details). I was given the chance to try one of these, but I need to have a 'proper' passive preamp to use them in - my home made bodge-up just won't do, whatever it 'sounds' like

[Marco]

Hi Dave,

Glenn Croft has used metal film resistors in his products for decades now (Holco's in my 4PP's I'm told) and harsh is something they've NEVER EVER been. Sweet certainly (although less, now Glenn told me a few updates to make to it), but never harsh.

Yup, same with my own Croft preamp, which DACT stepped attenuator aside, is full of metal-film resistors. Indeed, I don't think I've ever heard any piece of Croft equipment sound harsh.

Making the chain more transparent to the source *can* show tonal hardness in many speakers, the crossovers of which can go wrong right where our ears are the most sensitive IME. Live acoustic 'brass' can pin you to the wall with natural intensity, but this 'hard hitting' tone isn't the same as electronic harshness. Ali, I'm sorry if I'm going totally off the track.

Ali can of course comment for himself, but I think you're spot on, as what you've described above also mirrors my own experience. It's all about 'opening the window', as it were, as widely as possible, and sometimes in doing so, lets in some things that you didn't realise were there before...

That's when you have to decide if what you're hearing that you don't like is what *should* be there [i.e. is part of the music recording] or not - and decisions made at that point can either send you on the right path to reproducing a genuinely faithful representation of the music, or not, thus shaping your system's development accordingly.

Oh, and you can't measure for it either - only experienced ears can decide It certainly helps having a fundamental understanding of how real instruments and voices actually sound.

Marco.

[Ali Tait]

Ok, then I know nothing, am half deaf, have a crap system and not a clue how real instruments sound. Happy now?

[Marco]

No. Why are you reacting like this, daftee? No-one is saying that you're not entitled to your opinion, or that it isn't valid; just that we don't have to agree with it if our experience differs!

And more often than not, we agree about most things in hi-fi. No offence intended, but I just think you're wrong to say unequivocally that metal-film resistors = harsh. That's all

Marco.

[Firebottle]

I think there is a bit of leg pulling in that comment Marco, and you bit

Personally I think it depends exactly where in the circuit certain resistors are used, though with my limited experience I couldn't say definitively.

[Marco]

I think there is a bit of leg pulling in that comment Marco, and you bit

If so, that's fine - but it didn't seem that way...

Personally I think it depends exactly where in the circuit certain resistors are used, though with my limited experience I couldn't say definitively.

Yup, I'd agree with that. If you accept that every component used carries its own 'sonic signature', then quite simply, you don't want that signature to dominate. Therefore, as you say, you employ it selectively in certain positions within the circuit, where you consider it best facilitates what you're trying to create.

That principle applies to resistors, as much as it does to capacitors, valves, or anything else inside a piece of audio equipment; indeed it is precisely how 'voicing' is achieved. But then, as an equipment designer yourself, you already know all that!

Marco.

[User211]

I remember the Tisbury sounding a tad etched or sharp compared to my Air Tight passive.

The next time I get another passive I'll get the mic out to see if it was real. Be really curious to see what it makes of "potentiometer rolling". If it measures no change I'll be surprised - it easily "sees" valve rolls but that's a rather more complicated device than a potentiometer.

Note, Marco, I am not using the mic to decide what is best. I am using it to see if there is a measurable difference to give credibility to what I think I have heard i.e. check I am not deluding myself. Very important, I think.