Adding a pre amp

[davide256]

On 2/12/2018 at 2:50 PM, mustafakaiser said:

Hello guys.

 

At the moment I have a PS Audio Direct stream DAC with a JEFF ROWLAND 625S2 power amp and use SOTM set of 3. I am thinking to add the PS audio BKH pre amp. 

 

Can anyone shed some light on this?  

Cheers

Sounds like you need to start visiting Pass, Rowland, ARC and CJ dealers. I hear Chris likes/owns Constellation.

[Spacehound]

1 hour ago, Kimo said:

would not have an improved sound ality.So, it really is a religion for you.  You preach one thing, but follow another.  You are still missing most of what I said, though.

 

You do get points for the Tannoys.  They really do some wonderful musical things to enhance listener fun.  Too bad the Germans are now dragging the company down to an ugly finish.

 

I must add that I bet your system would sound better with a matching Naim preamp...

It would sound different but not have an improved sound quality. That's impossible for reasons  I have already stated. And with which Naim agree in their literature.  .

[Kimo]

7 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

It would sound different but not have an improved sound quality. That's impossible for reasons  I have already stated. And with which Naim agree in their literature.  .

Are you a monumental simpleton? 

[KingRex]

So I performed an interesting comparison for myself and posted it on another thread here.  It pertained to software affecting sound, but it applies here.  Distortion or not, what we all seek is accurate reproduction of music.  What is accurate?  Is it perfect bits or perfect reproduction of the source.  I think its perfect reproduction of actual voices and instruments.  What I did as an experiments was play a James Taylor song on my stereo.  Then I picked up my Yamaha acoustic guitar and played the song myself.  In listening to my instrument I had a base or shall I say reference sound /tone I was looking for.  It now became easy to see the playback of my server incorporating AO and HQ player did a much better job creating playback through my hifi that sounded like the real instrument.

 

Sooooo, if a preamp is put in and out of the signal path and in the end judged to bring the sound closer to the sound of the actual instrument, it is then benefiting the playback irregardless of any distortion added.   

[Dr Tone]

9 hours ago, firedog said:

Or it means that the reality is that most people have been conditioned to think colored sound is the more accurate. Maybe if they had listened for years to systems without a separate pre, they'd think a system with a pre sounds inaccurate and colored.

 

I'm not sure accurate came into the discussion with adding a preamp.  I spent years with a Devialet, I went looking for colored (fuller and warmer) when I decided to get rid of it.

 

There's too much time spent in this hobby looking for accurate and detail and not enough time just enjoying the music.

 

 

[barrows]

19 minutes ago, Dr Tone said:

 

I'm not sure accurate came into the discussion with adding a preamp.  I spent years with a Devialet, I went looking for colored (fuller and warmer) when I decided to get rid of it.

 

There's too much time spent in this hobby looking for accurate and detail and not enough time just enjoying the music.

 

 

Totally disagree: accurate is full and warm.  Real live music has fullness and warmth (mostly).  If your system does not portray the warmth and fullness of real live music it is inaccurate.

[The Computer Audiophile]

37 minutes ago, Kimo said:

Are you a monumental simpleton? 

Attack the argument not the person. 

[Kimo]

12 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Attack the argument not the person. 

He doesn't really have one.

 

And this becomes a problem, in that guys like him tend to be the type that chase away those from which many of us can actually learn something.  He should be posting on the Hoffman forum, or riding motorcycles with Sal.

[esldude]

36 minutes ago, Kimo said:

He doesn't really have one.

 

And this becomes a problem, in that guys like him tend to be the type that chase away those from which many of us can actually learn something.  He should be posting on the Hoffman forum, or riding motorcycles with Sal.

His argument is real, simple and nearly unrefutable.  DACs are quite capable of sending a signal to a power amp with no help.  No pre-amp could be more than audibly transparent, in which case you'll not hear it.  If you hear it, the reason is it altered the signal in some way.  Which means it added some distortion or some coloration or changed frequency balance did something which is lesser fidelity.  

 

Now you and others wish to say we think it sounded better so it is better.  If you like the sound better, there is no right or wrong preference.  However, the departure from accuracy is what you are preferring.  To say the preamp genuinely improved the signal fidelity is to make a mistake.  That is about what is argument is.  Yet you don't wish to believe your golden ears prefer lesser fidelity.  Nothing to be ashamed of really.  Doing so is quite right and fun.  Believing you improved the signal however is to fool yourself.  Just admit whatever the pre did you liked it. 

 

The other thing is you (like all humans) are susceptible to hearing what you believe.  You may believe strongly a good preamp is an improvement and hear one when it may have made no discernible difference without knowing which was which.  Again golden ears protest too much in such matters.  Just admit your humanity and roll on.  You leave yourself open to spending a significant amount of money for what is really nothing except unnecessary belief. 

[Kimo]

"His argument is real, simple and nearly unrefutable.  DACs are quite capable of sending a signal to a power amp with no help.  No pre-amp could be more than audibly transparent, in which case you'll not hear it.  If you hear it, the reason is it altered the signal in some way.  Which means it added some distortion or some coloration or changed frequency balance did something which is lesser fidelity." 

 

Adding buffers and gain stages can certainly improve sound quality, depending on a number of factors.  I believe that you mean well, but you are going over board.  By extension, any amplifying device with a single gain stage will surpass any other.  Do you really believe that?

 

The insertion of a high quality preamp may be preferable to relying on a poor volume control coupled with a weak or poorly designed power supply, even if transparency may suffer a bit.  S/N certainly will,  but so what.  There is more to it than that.  This has nothing to do with Golden Ears.  

[Kimo]

And while I am at, Spacehound's argument in question was that the Cambridge was the Holy Grail of neutrality.  My argument was that no such thing existed, and if you really want to try and come close, you better design amp and speaker together.  Oh, and that I haven't too many pro set ups sound all that much alike either.

 

But, I guess I summed up my position on preamps in the first reply, so that is that.  

[esldude]

8 minutes ago, Kimo said:

"His argument is real, simple and nearly unrefutable.  DACs are quite capable of sending a signal to a power amp with no help.  No pre-amp could be more than audibly transparent, in which case you'll not hear it.  If you hear it, the reason is it altered the signal in some way.  Which means it added some distortion or some coloration or changed frequency balance did something which is lesser fidelity." 

 

Adding buffers and gain stages can certainly improve sound quality, depending on a number of factors.  I believe that you mean well, but you are going over board.  By extension, any amplifying device with a single gain stage will surpass any other.  Do you really believe that?

 

The insertion of a high quality preamp may be preferable to relying on a poor volume control coupled with a weak or poorly designed power supply, even if transparency may suffer a bit.  S/N certainly will,  but so what.  There is more to it than that.  This has nothing to do with Golden Ears.  

Well one could certainly conjure up a shitty modern DAC/Pre that might benefit from a preamp.  Those are not nearly so common as believed.  Why anyone uses anything other than digital volume control is a mystery.  No analog control of any design can compete. 

 

If your DAC has a weak or poorly designed power supply don't buy a preamp to buffer it.  Buy a better DAC.  Is this really so hard to understand?

 

As for single stage amplifying device of any kind being better, you are putting words in my mouth that don't belong.  So stop the straw man approach.  

[Dr Tone]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

Totally disagree: accurate is full and warm.  Real live music has fullness and warmth (mostly).  If your system does not portray the warmth and fullness of real live music it is inaccurate.

 

And I totally disagree that live music is warm and full.  It’s many things but it certainly isn’t always warm and full.  I spent years playing in an acoustic trio, the other guitarist never wanted to be warm and full.

 

Every system that gets promoted to me as accurate and detailed makes me leave the room within a minute or 2.  If the said system portrays the warmth in a warm recording that’s nice but I don’t buy my music because it sounds best on my system.  I believe in voicing a system to sound the best with the plethora of music a person listens to.

[Kimo]

13 minutes ago, esldude said:

Well one could certainly conjure up a shitty modern DAC/Pre that might benefit from a preamp.  Those are not nearly so common as believed.  Why anyone uses anything other than digital volume control is a mystery.  No analog control of any design can compete. 

 

If your DAC has a weak or poorly designed power supply don't buy a preamp to buffer it.  Buy a better DAC.  Is this really so hard to understand?

 

As for single stage amplifying device of any kind being better, you are putting words in my mouth that don't belong.  So stop the straw man approach.  

Just listened to Benchmark DAC 3 playing into a couple of monoblocks with silly purported S/N ratio.  The designer of the monoblocks also makes his own preamp DAC.  Benchmark sounded better through that analog input than straight into the blocks.

 

By the way, calling something a "straw man" argument because it extends to your implications isn't really correct.  You basically stated that adding a gain stage between a DAC and amp would be a negative in almost every single case.  The implication being that adding a gain stage is only useful when it acts as band aid. 

 

Hence, the ultimate amplification device, by implication, would involve a single stage, no?  This assumes it is operating properly, of course.   

[esldude]

3 minutes ago, Kimo said:

Just listened to Benchmark DAC 3 playing into a couple of monoblocks with silly purported S/N ratio.  The designer of the monoblocks also makes his own preamp DAC.  Benchmark sounded better through that analog input than straight into the blocks.

 

By the way, calling something a "straw man" argument because it extends to your implications isn't really correct.  You basically stated that adding a gain stage between a DAC and amp would be a negative in almost every single case.  The implication being that adding a gain stage is only useful when it acts as band aid. 

 

Hence, the ultimate amplification device, by implication, would involve a single stage, no?  This assumes it is operating properly, of course.   

No because not all DACs that do a good job will have a single stage of amplification.  They may have opamps buffered by discrete circuits or opamps buffered by buffer opamps.  Or any number of configurations.  The idea is good DACs will have the necessary circuitry to drive the signal as good as can be done into the input of an amplifier.  So no active preamp needed.  It is redundant at best and possibly detrimental.  

[barrows]

4 minutes ago, Dr Tone said:

 

And I totally disagree that live music is warm and full.  It’s many things but it certainly isn’t always warm and full.  I spent years playing in an acoustic trio, the other guitarist never wanted to be warm and full.

 

Every system that gets promoted to me as accurate and detailed makes me leave the room within a minute or 2.  If the said system portrays the warmth in a warm recording that’s nice but I don’t buy my music because it sounds best on my system.  I believe in voicing a system to sound the best with the plethora of music a person listens to.

Maybe I did not make my point well enough, simply put: if one's system cannot portray the warmth and fullness of real music, then it is not accurate, it is bright and that is the result of a lack of accuracy.

One cannot make a system more accurate by adding additional components, additional (unnecessary) components can only add distortion/noise.  If a system of a DAC connected directly to an amplifier lacks warmth and fullness, there is a problem in that system, and the correct way to fix that problem is find the component which is lacking, and replace it with one that has no such lack, not by adding an additional component (and its additional flaws).  

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

55 minutes ago, esldude said:

Well one could certainly conjure up a shitty modern DAC/Pre that might benefit from a preamp.  Those are not nearly so common as believed.  Why anyone uses anything other than digital volume control is a mystery.  No analog control of any design can compete. 

 

If your DAC has a weak or poorly designed power supply don't buy a preamp to buffer it.  Buy a better DAC.  Is this really so hard to understand?

 

As for single stage amplifying device of any kind being better, you are putting words in my mouth that don't belong.  So stop the straw man approach.  

I prefer not to use a preamp, but systems that benefit from them aren’t always like you describe. 

 

On my constellation audio amps there is a Direct input and Balanced XLR input. The Direct input bypasses a gain stage in the amp and is designed to work with a constellation preamp. It also works with a few DACs, but not all. Using the Balanced XLR input can sound worse than the direct input. 

 

Some awesome DACs don’t drive this Direct input very well. 

 

Thus, it isn’t as black and white as you say. 

[Dr Tone]

31 minutes ago, barrows said:

Maybe I did not make my point well enough, simply put: if one's system cannot portray the warmth and fullness of real music, then it is not accurate, it is bright and that is the result of a lack of accuracy.

One cannot make a system more accurate by adding additional components, additional (unnecessary) components can only add distortion/noise.  If a system of a DAC connected directly to an amplifier lacks warmth and fullness, there is a problem in that system, and the correct way to fix that problem is find the component which is lacking, and replace it with one that has no such lack, not by adding an additional component (and its additional flaws).  

 

 

I don’t have a horse in this race, as I have analog gear and one DAC without volume control.

 

I get the point you are try to make but telling someone to not add something to their system even though it subjectively improves the experience for them is simply not something I would do.  Set the EQ, hit the loudness buttom or add another layer of distortion,  if it makes you love the music more go for it.

[esldude]

5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I prefer not to use a preamp, but systems that benefit from them aren’t always like you describe. 

 

On my constellation audio amps there is a Direct input and Balanced XLR input. The Direct input bypasses a gain stage in the amp and is designed to work with a constellation preamp. It also works with a few DACs, but not all. Using the Balanced XLR input can sound worse than the direct input. 

 

Some awesome DACs don’t drive this Direct input very well. 

 

Thus, it isn’t as black and white as you say. 

Odd and unusual configuration.  I don't think you'll find very many other pieces of gear for which such a thing is the case. 

 

It isn't 100% black and white.  It is maybe 90%.  

[Ralf11]

I suppose it is good that the OP has checked out...

 

Maybe we should list the Functions of a Pre-amp, then describe to what extent they are needed in a digital system.

 

We can argue about which systems need a preamp between DAC and amplifier to achieve the best possible sound.  I suggest that an older DAC or one that lacks some characteristics might benefit from a pre-amp.

 

Also, the dysphonic distortion added by a pre-amp may not be audible.

 

[Kimo]

1 hour ago, esldude said:

No because not all DACs that do a good job will have a single stage of amplification.  They may have opamps buffered by discrete circuits or opamps buffered by buffer opamps.  Or any number of configurations.  The idea is good DACs will have the necessary circuitry to drive the signal as good as can be done into the input of an amplifier.  So no active preamp needed.  It is redundant at best and possibly detrimental.  

I can't disagree with this, but I haven't necessary found it to be the case in practice.  I have found that the "simplest" amplifiers haven't always sounded the best, however.

[Spacehound]

6 hours ago, Kimo said:

Are you a monumental simpleton? 

So I've been told.

[Spacehound]

5 hours ago, Kimo said:

He doesn't really have one.

 

And this becomes a problem, in that guys like him tend to be the type that chase away those from which many of us can actually learn something.  He should be posting on the Hoffman forum, or riding motorcycles with Sal.

I've got a motorbike. Who are Hoffman and Sal?

[Spacehound]

7 hours ago, mevdinc said:

I've been listening to digital only for sometime now, and so far, I've managed to avoid having to put a preamp in my system. I find direct connection always gives better results.

I also happen to believe in 'best preamp is no preamp'. Provided, of course, that the DAC has a very good volume control. I had a Zodiac Gold DAC before, and now using Lindemann Musicbook DSD 20, both with very good analog volume controls.

I have also been using active speakers for over 20 years for similar reasons; no speaker cables, better matched amps and speakers etc. by the designer. ATC are well known for both driver and electronics design and implementation.

I know some friends who use preamps not to improve but change the sound a little to their liking; perhaps warmer, less analytical sound etc.

Of course, this subject is very subjective and everyone's experience is different.
IMHO, I believe that the biggest distortion comes from the mains and any improvements there gives better results than most other areas. For example, I clearly experienced huge SQ improvements using battery power with my Zodiac Gold DAC.

 

 

Sound quality isn't 'subjective' at all. What you personally happen to like is.

[Spacehound]

15 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

 You didn't address my concerns about using 2 transformers, one at the output of the DAC, and another at the input of the amplifier. My main concerns are phase changes and HF roll-off. Transformers are not distortion free either.

A good DAC should not need additional HF filtering, especially by using transformers at both ends.

I.M.E. wider bandwidth sounds better too .

BTW, my Class A Preamp has very close to 4 Zeroes in it's distortion figures. Neglecting the series 100 ohm resistors at the output, which sounds better with most interconnects of 1M or so, it's output impedance at 1KHZ is .002 ohms .

(calculated by an E.E. friend)

Unlike GUTBs recommendation, my preamp only has a gain of around 3.2  x to reduce the need for too much attenuation ,and the loss of more than necessary S/N

We aren't interested in your concerns. Mostly because  we don't share  'em.

 

Can your preamp turn  cartwheels too?