In Reply to: RE: Does this seem like a reasonable system ?. posted by tube wrangler on January 23, 2010 at 22:38:44:
"Can you even begin to imagine what would happen if this was replaced with a truly excellent passive preamp? How much greater would be the dynamics, how much cleaner the entire thing would sound, how much speed the reproducing chain would now be capable of, and how much better detail and bandwidth would be preserved?"I have both a Passive and Active Pre-amp from the same Company. If I want to suck the life out of my system, I'll hook up the passive. I have tried many passives, but have not seen one that beats a great active.
BTW - On a previous discussion with you regarding ground loops. I now know why you don't have a Ground Loop in your system, It's because you use a Passive Pre-amp. Not only have you "Lifted the Ground" - You have "Lifted" the entire Power Cord.
I lift the Ground on my Amplifiers To avoid the Ground Loop. Note for all you Safety Alarmists; I have a GFCI on the dedicated Circuit to my Amplifiers. - This is much safer than a 3 prong plug without a GFCI - This is according to the NEC - Not me! My system has a dead quiet, black backround using 45,2A3 and 300B SET amps -- SET amps don't hummm - It's the ground loops.
Edits: 01/24/10 01/24/10
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - Cut-Throat 13:26:23 01/24/10 (26)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - tube wrangler 19:50:17 01/24/10 (21)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - Tre' 17:14:43 01/25/10 (18)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - tube wrangler 17:27:59 01/25/10 (17)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - GEO 19:38:33 01/26/10 (7)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - tube wrangler 21:04:29 01/26/10 (6)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - PakProtector 10:00:11 01/28/10 (2)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - tube wrangler 11:58:59 01/28/10 (1)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - PakProtector 13:16:39 01/28/10 (0)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - GEO 08:59:44 01/28/10 (2)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - tube wrangler 11:21:49 01/28/10 (1)
- my old active had - GEO 12:05:55 01/28/10 (0)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - Tre' 17:42:35 01/25/10 (8)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - PakProtector 15:18:04 01/27/10 (7)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - Tre' 17:03:29 01/27/10 (6)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - PakProtector 04:18:47 01/28/10 (3)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - Tre' 13:20:06 01/29/10 (2)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - PakProtector 16:04:53 01/29/10 (1)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - Tre' 20:38:11 01/29/10 (0)
- A poor saleman at that..... - GEO 19:12:00 01/27/10 (1)
- RE: A poor saleman at that..... - PakProtector 13:24:22 01/30/10 (0)
- Well, I heard your system..................................... - Cut-Throat 14:15:48 01/25/10 (1)
- RE: Well, I heard your system..................................... - tube wrangler 18:04:11 01/25/10 (0)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - GEO 16:30:18 01/24/10 (3)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - mach1 20:09:40 01/24/10 (2)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - tube wrangler 22:53:01 01/24/10 (1)
- RE: Disagree on the passive pre-amp..................... - mach1 19:49:13 01/25/10 (0)