Most Critical to Sound Production - Amp or Preamp

[Fjd]

Choose the loudspeaker first, then address the appropriate room acoustic issues in relation to the loudspeaker choice.  Does your listening experience leave you with the feeling of something being off key, timing is wrong, the bass seems to linger, there are unbalanced time decays, peaks and valleys in the overall frequency response that can be easily heard?  Well, it just may be room acoustic issues that a new amplifier or a new preamplifier can never solve.

 

As long as a person has a grasp of how AC voltage moves between pieces of gear and understands impedance matching with the gear selection, the formal preamplifier as we know it may not even be necessary in many music reproduction systems. However, it seems that you will need an amplifier to provide some level of voltage gain, an amplifier that can play nice with the loudspeaker impedance curves and an amplifier that can handle any music peaks you will want to reproduce and experience in relation to your music selection, among other criteria. 

 

Here are a couple of PWK classic white papers to keep in mind when building a music reproduction system.

 

In “Dope From Hope, Vol 4, No. 3 August 21, 1963” PWK indicated that “In quality or accuracy, all loudspeakers err by greater or less amounts.  Comparison between them is not the best way to evaluate them.  Comparison with live sound would be much better when and if possible.  Then one would not judge which sounds best but which sounds most like the original.  If the original sounds bad, then surely, so should the reproduction.”

 

In “Dope From Hope, Vol 5, No. 1 Feb. 24, 1964” after the proper loudspeaker selection, PWK outlines that room acoustics are the second most important/critical aspect in achieving good audio. 

 

 

 

I'm really not an amp guy. But why be quiet?

In my view the pre amp is in a very friendly environment. The load is friendly and pretty constant. It does not have to produce power to speak of. They are all operating Class A. They just produce some voltage gain. (Yeah, some op-amp are push pull.)

This means that there is no great technological problem. An inexpensive one should do well. I haven't see a distortion level on pre-amps but there is no excuse for distortion in such undemanding environments.

As always, I'll point out that except for the new digital age, there are probably a dozen Class A low level amps in the chain between the microphone and the input to your power amp. They do well and the last one on your rig does to too. It is not going to ruin things

OTOH, the power amp has to do just that, produce power. The speaker load is variable with frequency. This is more demanding on the technology. Therefore, you should expect to have to spend money there to get good results.

WMcD

 

 

 

 

Power amps and the like are one subject. Not addressed here.

But I still wonder about the chain of electronics e.g. microphone amps, mixers, etc., which were used to produce recording, in history, we admire or maybe less so. This is all low level processing.

Over the years the equipment is tube or transistor, operating in Class A. The equipment uses capacitors and sometimes transformers which are subject to love and hate. But that is what we've got just before the signal is stored and distributed, by any number of means.

For example, you can say that tubes or transistors or caps are good or bad in my pre-amp. Yet the signal has probably been processed through multiple stages of equipment using the devices which are praised or vilified. That can't be un-done.

As an extension, do we really think that a pre-amp is going to do more harm or good than all the proceeding ones? It can't cure anything.

If here is one last stage of small amplification using similar devices and topology in our living room, how much can we hope to accomplish?

WMcD

 

 

 

To borrow an iconic phrase from Ten Bears, "there is iron in your words."  Yep, I just got done watching the movie "The Outlaw Josey Wales" and decided to read a little.

 

You sure outlined way too many variables to even think about all of the potential impacts when considering the audio reproduction chain as the initial capture of the performance all the way to the output from the speaker in a home listening environment.

 

In my experience at the “home” level, for a well-implemented system, well-engineered circuits constructed into amplifiers with quality parts of the appropriate specifications, whether tube or solid state, will appear to exhibit more similarities than differences on my Klipschorn implementation. 

 

 

 

Wow Gill, I always enjoy reading your posts as you always know how to cull the “wheat from the chaff”!!!

 

The multitude of variables that cannot be controlled or even identified seem so overwhelming! Thinking about it from the perspectives you have outlined, it seems that we are essentially converting the acoustic pressure of a performance into an electrical signal, meaning that every recording begins with a microphone and ends with a loudspeaker, along with hundreds upon hundreds of potentially mediocre parts that include opamps, capacitors, wires, cables, resistors, transformers, etc., etc., etc.

 

In some respects, this seems to mean to me that there just isn’t a “holy grail” gear component, whether it be amplifier, preamplifier, cable, power cords, etc., regardless of what the audio industry reviewers may tend to have you believe.  Shocking news indeed!!!

 

In addition, another piece of shocking news, is how easy it can be to come to the conclusion that most of the source is “crap” too once a person reads the “loudness wars” and “missing octave” threads.

All the preconceived "stereo-types" (another poor attempt at a pun) from my youth utterly smashed, shattered, broken into unrecognizable pieces; and spew across the lawn like a strong fall wind blowing old, dead, dried leaves (at least the colors can be great).

 

Is it any wonder that my forum signature is really my attempt at parody or mild satire about the audio industry?  Yea, I know, keep the day job!

 

 

It has become perfectly clear to me that there just isn’t a “holy grail” gear component; and one component in my home cannot necessarily undo any of the twisting, mangling, disfiguring, contorting, dirtying, cleaning, and reconstructing of the AC voltage that occurs long before it gets to my gear.    

 

["Listening to music is often a holistic, multidimensional experience that includes emotions, reactions, and involvement in the music."]

 

Experiencing any form of art, including music, is such a personal experience that is unique to that individual; and that personal experience cannot necessarily be reliably bottled, measured, quantified and homogenized for mass consumption in any way, shape or form.  The experience cannot be correlated solely to a DBX test or an audio magazine subjective review.  

 

"it is important for us to remain cognizant of the fact that we are always looking through a small window on a very complex experience and to remain forever skeptical of our own conclusions and methods and as well as remain open-minded about the conclusions of others." - Bob Katz engineer of the Chesky recordings

 

I firmly believe that the ear (e.g., a “trained ear” and even an “untrained” ear) can enjoy the music reproduction experience; and along the way detect very small differences that seem very inconsequential on the surface.  I certainly cannot find fault with those that just use their ears and go with what provides the listening experience they are looking for and try not to question the person's individual selection of gear.  However, I try to remind that although the ear can detect very small differences, the brain (and this applies to the brain of the “trained ear” as well as the “untrained” ear) may not exactly know what specific aspect of the music reproduction chain to attribute the difference.  All bets are off whether something will work for me until I’ve heard something in my listening space.

 

 ["They make miniature tubes and miniature loudspeakers, but they have yet to come up with a miniature 32-foot wavelength." – PWK]

 

Regardless of what they try to dupe you into believing with all that Shakespearean prose called a “review,” you just can’t change physics.  We never could and we never will.

 

It sure seems like great entertainment can be had for all.

 

[Woofers and Tweeters]

Most important in the system to make better sound is the cables 

[jimjimbo]

Most important in the system to make better sound is the cables 

And the wooden cable risers....Bazinga is my wood of choice.....

[Fjd]

The wisenheimer responds, "What is the most important leg of a three-legged stool?" But that doesn't help.

WMcD

 

 

 

Now talking about three legs does make me wonder where this woman buys her shoes; and if she has to buy two right and one left or two left and one right or three left, etc.?

 

 

 

 

 

[pzannucci]

The answer is both though since that doesn't help, if you are only using the pre-amp as a line switching (line pre-amplifier) then as long as it is clean/quiet, puts out enough voltage, doesn't pick up interference, and has the required inputs, then the amp.  Source also has to fit these guidelines.

 

The amp and speaker combo will be key to the sound.  If the amp can not drive the speakers appropriately or has a lot of noise, you will notice that immediately.  

 

Take for instance, a lot of tube amps, they respond to the impedance of the speaker and don't provide a lot of bass drive like a good solid state.  If you like lovely mids and don't worry about the bass tightness and umph, the tube amp will be the most serious impact on the sound (outside of the speakers).  If you need the drive in the bottom end, you could use a good high current solid state amp.  Be careful with the solid state because more inexpensive ones will be more grainy and have less drive.  Also SS amps are typically not as liquid as tube.

 

Just some basic thoughts and overly general but suffice it to say, big Klipsch can run on small tube amps but don't look for head banging and the pre-amp comes up higher in relevance.  If you end up with a set of Maggies or Apogee type speakers, unless you have huge power reserves, SS is the only way to go.  In these instances the pre-amp definitely drops down in relevance.  

[Marvel]

Eth, didn't you just get a $9k + preamp? I would have asked this question first.

Mediocre components that work well together will sound better than expensive ones that don't. All the way through the chain.

Bruce

[JJkizak]

The original mix done at the studio.

JJK

[Cantilope]

I happen to be in the camp of no pre-amp or minimal at least.  I ran the Schiit SYS passive mentioned and compared it to my McIntosh C32.  I love the Bass and Loudness that the C32 can inject into the sound, but I really had no problems using the SYS ultimately replacing it with an Oppo which does my volume attenuation and DAC duties now.  Once I finally got my speakers and xovers dialed in, I found the loudness and bass where too much anyway and pulled the C32 in favor of the $50 passive pre without the tone controls.  I'd also go with a digital xover way before I got a pre-amp, much better tone control and mitigation plus time alignment and you can add gain, just like a pre.

 

My humble opinion is that the Preamp can mitigate other issues, but if you have a good gain structure and volume attenuation, totally unnecessary.  Especially with high efficiency speakers.  I cannot wrap my brain around how adding one could be better, I mean how?  It is just more stuff, messing with the signal.  I will admit to not understanding the mis-match impedance thing, maybe I have just been lucky.

[Ski Bum]

Good point, Cantilope, the "There's no pre-amp as perfectly transparent as literally no pre-amp" approach. 

 

I used to have an almost ideal room for my fortes, and the system consisted of source->amp->speakers, and it was truly Klipschtastic.  Currently, the larger room and less than ideal room coupling demands eq, so a pre-amp that offers a bit more than basic tone controls is in play.

[eth2]

Eth, didn't you just get a $9k + preamp? I would have asked this question first.

Mediocre components that work well together will sound better than expensive ones that don't. All the way through the chain.

Bruce

 

Just trying to figure out if I have to buy a new amp.  ;-)

[pbphoto]

I was wondering what impact my 15-year old low-end Yamaha AVR, now being used as a preamp, had on the sound.  Spent an hour or more Friday comparing the sound from my DAC fed through the Yamaha to my Mcintosh amp as normal vs directly connecting my DAC to the amp.  Tried to level match things as best I could for a fair comparison.  I swapped around the RCA cables 20+ times.  I thought I could hear more dynamics and clarity with the Yamaha out of the signal path, but I'm not sure.  I was surprised how close it was.  And this is a Yamaha AVR prior to when they started coming out with things like "pure direct" - the best I can do is set "effect off" which I think still does an A/D/A conversion.  Maybe I'll run another test.

 

I like the idea of just using a SYS.  This has got my wheels turning.

[Cantilope]

I was wondering what impact my 15-year old low-end Yamaha AVR, now being used as a preamp, had on the sound.  Spent an hour or more Friday comparing the sound from my DAC fed through the Yamaha to my Mcintosh amp as normal vs directly connecting my DAC to the amp.  Tried to level match things as best I could for a fair comparison.  I swapped around the RCA cables 20+ times.  I thought I could hear more dynamics and clarity with the Yamaha out of the signal path, but I'm not sure.  I was surprised how close it was.  And this is a Yamaha AVR prior to when they started coming out with things like "pure direct" - the best I can do is set "effect off" which I think still does an A/D/A conversion.  Maybe I'll run another test.

 

I like the idea of just using a SYS.  This has got my wheels turning.

The SYS also has the ability to switch inputs.  Take your Source and split the signal to the AVR and the SYS with a splitter, then run the out of the AVR to the other input of the SYS (it's passive so it is not adding anything so no harm here) and you can push the button on the SYS and a/b them pretty closely as you can add the AVR and remove it without unwiring it.

 

Be curious as to what you think...

[Bubo]

In developing an audiophile level system, which is the most critical component, the amp or the preamp? Restated, if you had to put your money in one or the other, would it be the amp or the premp?

 

 

Will you be listening to Vinyl or Digital?

 

Which speakers are you planning to buy, huge impact on the amp decision.

[eth2]

 

In developing an audiophile level system, which is the most critical component, the amp or the preamp? Restated, if you had to put your money in one or the other, would it be the amp or the premp?

 

 

Will you be listening to Vinyl or Digital?

BOTH

 

Which speakers are you planning to buy, huge impact on the amp decision.

KHORNS

 

[eth2]

I just bought a Pass 30.5 and am interested in comparing a SS to either the VAC's or the VRD's. The 30.5 is supposed to be a nice solid state amp, and had fantastic reviews until the 30.8 came out and now it is relagated to the trash heap. So much for reviews.

[paul79]

You can relegate it to my trash bin ANYTIME! Curious to your thoughts on this one....

[Bubo]

Pass 30.5 with K-Horns should be more than enough power and I am sure the pass specs out vs other good amps.

 

Since Vinyl and Digital yes you need a pre-amp.

 

I would look at the SN and the performance of the phono section. I like tone controls and loudness and high and low filters etc. I get best result with a stand alone EQ connected as tape in tape out. I use the old school analog EQs to great effect, the newer digital ones the conversion rates are so high that the quantization error should be minimal or inaudible. A lot of people like the DBX unit, but there are lots of choices, ones that EQ the system and rooms are nice then you can tweak  the sound to your preference and make your own presets.

 

If the pre amp has no phono section, or a weak one, there are lots and lots of good stand alone phono sections for not much coin. A lot of people are satisfied with EMO. If you are not sure you might post the voltage and impedance numbers for the amp and pre amp RCA line jacks and ask for feedback.

 

The system only sounds as good as the worst component. Price is a factor but not the primary one in sound or quality.

 

As to the room and furniture: hard surfaces bad, soft absorbent surfaces like rugs, curtains, stuffed furniture, books good.

Edited May 9, 2016 by Bubo

[pbphoto]

 

I was wondering what impact my 15-year old low-end Yamaha AVR, now being used as a preamp, had on the sound.  Spent an hour or more Friday comparing the sound from my DAC fed through the Yamaha to my Mcintosh amp as normal vs directly connecting my DAC to the amp.  Tried to level match things as best I could for a fair comparison.  I swapped around the RCA cables 20+ times.  I thought I could hear more dynamics and clarity with the Yamaha out of the signal path, but I'm not sure.  I was surprised how close it was.  And this is a Yamaha AVR prior to when they started coming out with things like "pure direct" - the best I can do is set "effect off" which I think still does an A/D/A conversion.  Maybe I'll run another test.

 

I like the idea of just using a SYS.  This has got my wheels turning.

The SYS also has the ability to switch inputs.  Take your Source and split the signal to the AVR and the SYS with a splitter, then run the out of the AVR to the other input of the SYS (it's passive so it is not adding anything so no harm here) and you can push the button on the SYS and a/b them pretty closely as you can add the AVR and remove it without unwiring it.

 

Be curious as to what you think...

 

Ok, the SYS came today.  Did some A/B testing using Y-splitters coming out of the DAC, with the following two signal paths:

 

1) DAC --> SYS --> AMP --> LaScala 2

2) DAC --> AVR --> SYS --> AMP --> LaScala 2

 

I'll be damned if I couldn't tell a lick of difference.  My son was pushing the button on the SYS to switch between the paths.  I got nothin'.  Several different types of music, male vocals,

female vocals, loud, soft (both paths volume matched) - no difference.  I switched positions with my son figuring his 16-year old ears could detect something.  He couldn't tell any difference either.

 

Unless my testing was flawed, or there is a weak link in my chain dumbing things down to the lowest common denominator, or our ears aren't "golden", then my conclusion is my AVR

in my setup is not affecting two-channel sound quality.

 

Now, I still may buy a new AVR for other things like room calibration and/or modern features.  But I'm in no rush.  And I'm also not as concerned about "pure direct" modes, analog stage

quality, and A/D/A conversions mucking up my two-channel sound quality.  If my 15-year old Yamaha HTR-5250 (about $400 new IIRC) isn't messing up my sound, then a modern AVR

certainly shouldn't, and I am more open improvements done in the digital realm by room calibration etc.

[Cut-Throat]

I did not read every post.....But given the choice between Amp or Pre-Amp, The Amp wins hands down. You don't even need a pre-amp if your amplifier or source has Gain Controls. Just plug your source into your amp and away you go.

 

This is pretty much a No-brainer!

Edited May 13, 2016 by Cut-Throat

[wvu80]

Most important in the system to make better sound is the cables

 

Hey, I wanted to make that joke!!! 

 

Pre.