Why go through a preamp?

[phileserver39]

I have read recently that the simpler the signal chain the better the reproduction of the source sound. I have a decent sound card whose op amps have been modded. Am I gaining anything by going through a tube preamp? Should I just come out of my sound card and go into my amplifier? I realize that using a pre allows for ease of volume control and most likely better impedance matching but are those the only advantages?

Here is my current two channel setup

Asus STX sound card (op amp upgrade)
YS Audio Experience Symphonies Plus Preamp
NAD 2400 THX Amplifier
Allison Four large bookshelf speakers

Thanks for your time and expertise,

Jason

[Feanor]

I have read recently that the simpler the signal chain the better the reproduction of the source sound. I have a decent sound card whose op amps have been modded. Am I gaining anything by going through a tube preamp? Should I just come out of my sound card and go into my amplifier? I realize that using a pre allows for ease of volume control and most likely better impedance matching but are those the only advantages?
....
Thanks for your time and expertise,

Jason
Yes.

Although a tube preamp can add pleasant distortion that many people like. And, depending on the preamp, it could make the impedence match worse rather than better.

[Ajani]

My suggestion is to try it out and see if you like it... So remove the tube pre from the signal path and listen to the result...

I believe in the concept of minimal items in the signal path, but IMO that really depends on the quality of those select item that you keep... Removing a pre in theory is the best thing, but it assumes that your source and amp have great synergy and sound quality by themselves... Some persons prefer the sound a pre brings (even if it is really due to some kind of distortion)...

[frahengeo]

I realize that using a pre allows for ease of volume control and most likely better impedance matching but are those the only advantages?

Source selection. If the PC sound card is the only input, then this is obviously moot.

[harley .guy07]

That is the only thing about my PS audio digi link 3 that I with it had was a variable output with volume control so I could take my Yamaha receiver out of the mix to see how it changes the signal and give me a clue which way to go with a preamp. Some dacs have this and I have heard mixed thoughts about its use in this way but it would be a nice feature to try due to the fact that I do not use the tone controls on my Yamaha at all to alter the sound since my Dynaudio's sound great with no correction what so ever.

[phileserver39]

Hey all,

I thank each of you for your input. I decided there was no danger to my amp and ran a set of good interconnects from my computer's sc right into my NAD amp.

Hmmmmm.....interesting(?).....

I don't know guys, I am probably the wrong person to be able to give an accurate response to the differences I hear. I STRONGLY feel that my "audible memory" is terrible (in contrast to other senses). After all, there are so many things to listen for, how can I possibly take a snapshot and compare that to what I hear live with any accuracy? Maybe it takes practice in the same way that having perfect pitch takes practice.....wait a minute. Can one practice to have perfect pitch or does it come naturally?

I THINK that I hear more space between instruments and everything has "moved forward" and out from under the sheer sheet that I didn't knew covered my **** (?).

However, that may be the result of everything sounding too digital. For some reason I think that the instruments and vocals sounded more real through the tube pre. However, this appears to be far more prevalent while playing through my Klipsch KLF-10s than my Allison Fours.

Thanks again for y'all's time and thoughts,

J

[Ajani]

Hey all,

I thank each of you for your input. I decided there was no danger to my amp and ran a set of good interconnects from my computer's sc right into my NAD amp.

Hmmmmm.....interesting(?).....

I don't know guys, I am probably the wrong person to be able to give an accurate response to the differences I hear. I STRONGLY feel that my "audible memory" is terrible (in contrast to other senses). After all, there are so many things to listen for, how can I possibly take a snapshot and compare that to what I hear live with any accuracy? Maybe it takes practice in the same way that having perfect pitch takes practice.....wait a minute. Can one practice to have perfect pitch or does it come naturally?

I THINK that I hear more space between instruments and everything has "moved forward" and out from under the sheer sheet that I didn't knew covered my **** (?).

However, that may be the result of everything sounding too digital. For some reason I think that the instruments and vocals sounded more real through the tube pre. However, this appears to be far more prevalent while playing through my Klipsch KLF-10s than my Allison Fours.

Thanks again for y'all's time and thoughts,

J

IMO, the hardest way to tell the difference between 2 components is a quick switch... I'd suggest living with no preamp setup for a few days or weeks and then switching back to the NAD pre... That should really give you time to notice the differences... Of course, if you just don't like the sound from the start, then I wouldn't recommend struggling through days or weeks of bad sound...

[JoeE SP9]

I agree with Ajani. Quickly switching (DBX type testing) between two preamps, two power amps or any two devices rarely allows one to hear the subtle differences that components have. There is a thread on this site about that sort of loved it at first but hate it now sound.

[02audionoob]

...Although a tube preamp can add pleasant distortion that many people like...


...For some reason I think that the instruments and vocals sounded more real through the tube pre...


These two comments seem to match up rather well.

[poppachubby]

I imagine the tubed pre will slow down the digital excitement, but make it more listenable. As you have observed, there is a musical quality when tubes are involved.

Frankly, I would much rather have a wonderful preamp voicing my system than not, particularily if you are stretching to find reasons against it. Signal degredation is a fine argument, but when the gear is of a high quality, it becomes less of a concern IMO.

Tubed or horrid state, it doesn't matter to me but in your case the tubes will be a bonus I think. I have excellent examples of both types and have come to the conclusion that I love them both.

Also consider tube rolling as a way to improve or simply change the sonic character.

[Ajani]

I imagine the tubed pre will slow down the digital excitement, but make it more listenable. As you have observed, there is a musical quality when tubes are involved.

Frankly, I would much rather have a wonderful preamp voicing my system than not, particularily if you are stretching to find reasons against it. Signal degredation is a fine argument, but when the gear is of a high quality, it becomes less of a concern IMO.

Tubed or horrid state, it doesn't matter to me but in your case the tubes will be a bonus I think. I have excellent examples of both types and have come to the conclusion that I love them both.

Also consider tube rolling as a way to improve or simply change the sonic character.

I actually see it the opposite way: when your gear is of a high enough quality then you don't need a pre to 'tailor' the sound between source and amp.

IMO, having to put a pre in the signal path means you don't like your source/amp as much as you could... So perhaps the better investment is a better source/amp rather than a middleman (pre)...

For example; instead of getting a tube pre to insert between a DAC (with variable out) and a high powered SS amp, the better option would probably be to get either a hybrid amp or a high powered tube amp and connect directly to the DAC...

[Hyfi]

Always make sure to listen to the same disks when swapping out components also. Pick a disk that you know will shine on a high end system and use it to ABX.

[poppachubby]

Yes Ajani, that's right. There's 2 sides to the coin here, hopefully the OP has some ability to listen to some configurations and possibly audition some new gear also.

Personally, I wouldn't want to rely on the sound card to voice my amp. Yes it has a variable output, but whether it's up to the task of sonic bliss is another thing. A good DAC with variable outputs would be a step up, but costly at the same time.

I agree if money is to be spent, the big picture should be considered.

[Ajani]

Yes Ajani, that's right. There's 2 sides to the coin here, hopefully the OP has some ability to listen to some configurations and possibly audition some new gear also.

Personally, I wouldn't want to rely on the sound card to voice my amp. Yes it has a variable output, but whether it's up to the task of sonic bliss is another thing. A good DAC with variable outputs would be a step up, but costly at the same time.

I agree if money is to be spent, the big picture should be considered.

I would agree that a sound card likely isn't going to cut it in the long run, though the op 'may' find that he prefers it to an entry level NAD pre... Anyway, as he already has all the components, then he really should just take some time and experiment with different options...

[E-Stat]

Should I just come out of my sound card and go into my amplifier?
Yes. The card is capable of 2 V output and your amp has a 1 V sensitivity so you should be able to drive the amp just fine. Its input impedance is a touch low at 20k ohms so I would keep your interconnects short to avoid HF roll off. In both my music systems, I prefer the added resolution afforded by not choosing to use an otherwise superfluous gain stage. Preamps originally were required to provide sufficient gain for the amplifier which remains the case when using a phono source.

rw

[poppachubby]

superfluous


:prrr: ...says the guy with an SP9. Used only for phono I might add!! Actually I am starting to think that I should assist you in removal of all superfluous gear that may be lying around your house E.

I'll be by tonight, that should give you enough time to box everything up. If it's just the pre amps, I will understand.

[E-Stat]

...says the guy with an SP9. Used only for phono I might add!!
That's where it works best. While the MKIII is a fine preamp, it nevertheless leaves its sonic mark on the sound. With the CD source, there is some loss of resolution, a slight mid-bass bump and a narrower stage width due to its somewhat lowish separation - which doesn't come into play with phono sources where it excels. Since I prefer MC cartridges, I need more gain that most preamps like its predecessor, an SP-6C provide. With 67 db of gain, I have plenty of headroom with a mid-output cartridge and still get a low noise floor. It would be truly costly to better its performance in this application. A Manley Steelhead, an ARC LS-17/PH5, or a Mac C2300 would run $4-5k used.


Actually I am starting to think that I should assist you in removal of all superfluous gear that may be lying around your house
Too late! I recently sold three CD players/changers, a pair of JPS Labs power cords, and an equalizer. All that remains on the shelf is a Sony cassette recorder used for converting old tapes to digital for friends and family.

rw

[Poultrygeist]

A common mod for the miniwatt is to bi-pass the volume pot and reduce the signal path by one pot. I thought about this until I decided that the MW sounds better without a preamp or at least without any preamp I've tried. Glad I didn't do the mod. Too much or too little gain seems to be the key.

[poppachubby]

That's where it works best. While the MKIII is a fine preamp, it nevertheless leaves its sonic mark on the sound. With the CD source, there is some loss of resolution, a slight mid-bass bump and a narrower stage width due to its somewhat lowish separation

rw

Funny you mention this, I have the same issue with my EICO, a low mid hump. It's improved greatly with the addition of some most excellent tubes. I find it reveals itself most unnaturally on vocals, females with a husky voice like Diana Krall. That said, it's at it's worst when the db's increase, like if she belts out a lower note.

I can't say I don't care, but the HF85 certainly makes up for it's flaws. Just a magical presentation, bringing the featured instrument/vocalist WAY out front for the listener to examine or just be awe struck. Incredibly engaging which is what I prefer.

I would like to upgrade my pre down the road. I always saw myself with an SP9 but perhaps I will need to move past it in order to trounce the EICO.

What tubes are you using in your SP9?

[E-Stat]

I would like to upgrade my pre down the road. I always saw myself with an SP9 but perhaps I will need to move past it in order to trounce the EICO.
I think it helps to put my comments into perspective. My reference for the best sounding phono preamp is either the Zanden tube phono stage or the battery powered ASR driving either a Conrad-Johnson ART III or a VTL 7.5 II. For $30k, one can get really nice results. :) For a grand or so used, however, I think the SP-9MKIII does exceptionally well. As I mentioned earlier, you would be hard pressed to find a better high gain solution without spending a great deal more. I would avoid the original SP-9 because it has a thin sound and less resolution. Mine was originally a MKII and it was factory updated to MKIII. Here (http://www.arcdb.ws/) is where you can find more information about the three generations of the SP-9. There is also an extensive review of the original and the MKII in Stereophile. It is there where I discovered the cause of the stage width limitation. Unfortunately, there was not a final follow up with the MKIII version which was better still.

Digital sources, however, change the equation. My CDP has a 4 volt output which I viewed initially as a liability. Even with the reduced gain CD input, the volume control had little range at the bottom. After building an inexpensive set of attenuators using Radio Shack parts, I realized there was no benefit to me by having a line stage. What's a perfect line stage anyway? A straight wire with gain/. What if you don't need any gain - or the need to drive long cables? No matter how good a unit is, it cannot improve the signal - only change it. I now use a DIY solution using DACT stepped attenuators, JPS Labs cable and Cardas connectors in a Par-Metals aluminum case.


What tubes are you using in your SP9?
First of all, realize that like many Audio Research products, it is a hybrid. Both the phono and line stages use an FET front end followed by a 6922. I've used quite a few different tubes over the years and presently use late 60's vintage gold pin Amperex 7308s.

rw