|
Amp/Preamp Asylum Looking for a new Amp or Preamp? If you're after tubes, post over here. |
|
|
|
Amp/Preamp Asylum Looking for a new Amp or Preamp? If you're after tubes, post over here. |
|
In Reply to: preamps: passive versus active posted by Bigromano on April 3, 2008 at 16:19:56:
Most audiophiles adhere to the logic that the most simple and shortest signal path is best. However, most do not use passive preamps- even though they could. It does not make any sense to me. There can be issues with cable capacitence but a buffer in the passive or short cable runs can alleviate this most of the time. Synergy between the sources an amp becomes more important.In some systems a passive simply will not work. The key ingredients are a source that has sufficient output voltage to drive the amp to its full rated output power (input sensativity of the amp and output voltage of the source are the key metrics here) and that the load of the amplifier is not to much for the source to drive. (Input impedance of amplifier) The overwhelming majority of the time both these metrics will be met.
The common reasoning behind active units are superior drive and punch. But think about this- since the output voltage of the source can drive the amp itself- the active unit is amplifying a signal already sufficient and then attenuating it back down to lower than when it came in. (Or vice versa) This is certainly not "simple" and does not coincide with conventional audiophile wisdom.
Some like the sound better and you should go with whatever floats your boat, but arguing that the signal is more or even as true would be very difficult. And outside of enjoying the music isnt that exactly what this hobby is all about?
-Rob
Edits: 04/03/08 04/03/08
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: preamps: passive versus active - robber 18:26:53 04/03/08 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
