|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.104.179.31
assembling a new system - recently purchased a McCormack DNA - 125 - thinking of purchasing a 308t but NOT a preamp - is this advisable? -speakers are Tyler Acoustics - thanks!
Follow Ups:
to upgrade the caps, I did hook up my 308T direct to my V12R. I was happy, it sounded damn good, but when I installed the SLP98 again I realized that I was missing the full sound and better soundstage the pre added. With an average pre, I would have preferred it with just the 308T. At that point, the 98 was fully modded by Cary, and it don't get much better than that with the right NOS 6SN7 tubes. The 308T is very nice with 7316 Amperex, but best with Tel ECC 802S.
I’m not familiar with yours and definitely think it’s worth trying.A traditional preamplifier provides 1) source selection / switching, 2) pre-amplification, 3) volume control, 4) impedance matching. With many of today's playback systems exclusively using digital sources that provide more than sufficient output levels to directly drive the power amp without additional pre-amplification, eliminating the preamplifier should provide undeniable sonic advantages. A shorter and simpler signal path should result in a purer sound and nothing is (or can be) more invisible or neutral as one less link in the chain. Using a modern cdp should take care of item 1 and 2, but 3 and 4 needs to addressed as well.
In theory, CD players with a built-in volume control and driver stages that are equal or better to that of a separate preamp should offer an advantage of dispensing the preamp and extra interconnect…one less cable and at least one less gain stage should translate into cleaner, more immediate sound. While the idea is appealing from a conceptual standpoint, finding one capable of doing so seems limited to perhaps a very select few and the likelihood is most will be compromised with lesser quality parts.
My selection was limited, but prefered running through either a passive or active preamp over direct. Overall, running direct was a bit thin and noticed a loss of data, some congestion and constriction with the volume control engaged vs maximum. Bypassing the built in volume controls with a better passive was less closed-in, more dynamic, open, and effortless…somehow causes a much blacker, purer, more grain less background w/o the loss of detail. Experimenting further, found an active preamp could (depending upon quality) offer a more full bodied effect with better imaging and sound staging, but at a reduction in transparency.
Believe what your ears say - not hearsay.
I can't say anything in favor of direct connection to the power amp, but I've been using the 308T player with integrated amplifiers and can say that it is quite a decent player.
thanks for the responses - tried a search, many glowing reviews about the cdp but not much about using it direct - digepix, your post echos my thoughts exactly!
I have not tried it... but I think I remember posts here that said it wasn't the best sound. That using a pre-amp was better. Do a search.I have the 308-T and it's a great CDP, but my integrated doesn't have a way to bypass the pre-amp.
Why not? You have variable output with 3.6V max. you should drive the McCormack to full volume. If you can eliminate the preamp it should be a no brainer. Save your money for music or better cables.
I have been using the source's variable outs for years (1cdp, 1 dac, and now a PC), and NEVER plan to by a conventional stand alone pre. You are so right about ending up with a better system that way. THe only caveat being that you have to ONLY listen to cds, or other digital sources if the cdp has digital ins.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: