Amp/Preamp Asylum

Looking for a new Amp or Preamp? If you're after tubes, post over here.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Not sure I made my point clear...

Posted by E-Stat on May 15, 2011 at 12:49:56:
I was lucky to have an amp and speakers that were capable of showcasing the considerable advantage the LS3 holds over 'pre-amp-less' (and other pre-amps) in the lower-mids - otherwise, I might never have bought it. If, however, ones amps or speakers also limit the lower-mids, as the vast majority do, then one will never notice that much of a difference in this area."

I agree about the importance of the "warmth" region. In my case, I find no difference in tonal quality between using my ARC preamp vs. DACT attenuators with a GamuT CD-1. Only a loss of transparency and stage width using the preamp.

And though I'm familiar with my own LS3, I'm not sure the SP9 (both ARC) shares the attribute at low-mid, though I think it should.

I originally bought the unit as a MKII and had the factory update it to MKIII specs. That change itself improved the lower midrange output and removed a touch of thinness with the MKII flavor. I don't perceive any change of tonal balance when the preamp is bypassed and replaced by attenuators.

Additionally, all great electro-stat di-poles such as yours depend a lot on 'boundary assistance' for reinforcement at the lower-mids in the sense that their characteristics, here, can be adjusted to cooler or warmer tones by placement.

Couldn't agree more. I spent a considerable amount of time experimenting with speaker placement, backplate setting (bass control for the Sound Labs) and bass trap placement. Through listening and verification with measurements, I arrived at a roughly eight foot out from the back wall placement for the speakers with all the 18" trips behind them. I got extremely smooth response from 25 hz to 200 hz.

My suggestion would be, if you're so inclined, to try this experiment with your double-stacked (New) Advents, the SP9, and an amp renown for lower-mid performance - Mac, C-J, ARC, etc (most high-end tube-amps would do).

In the vintage system, I run a Manley DAC with tube output directly to a Threshold Stasis 3. As for New Advents vs. old, they have more power handling and better top end response with a simpler crossover (which I have updated). Advents don't mate well with tube amps at all because of their high output impedance. The Stasis works significantly better with them. And having the DAC line stage drive the amps directly improved resolution.

Is it A-1?

U-1s with the steel frame using the "Hot Rodded" backplates with improved passive parts. Click my moniker to find more details and pics.

Congrats, again, on 2 great systems!

Thanks.

rw