Ok. But given that a power amp can typically have an input sensitivity of a volt or so, why would the "preamp" need to be anything more than an attenuator? Would you not consider such an amp an "integrated"?
se
(Sorry I’m a bit late to the thread).
My pet theory says that it should be ‘horses for courses’:
…If you are designing an integrated then make a high gain amp section, use good supplies, and plonk an attenuator at the input.
…If you are designing separate pre and power amps then place the power amps adjacent to the speakers and consider going the ‘whole hog’ by using one power amp per drive unit.
…If you have no need for gain, and if you have no impedance issues, then use an optimised attenuator.
…If you need phono / RIAA equalisation then either place it next to your turntable (best performance) or inside your preamplifier (shares power supply, hence is lower cost).
… etc., etc., etc. …
All of the rhetoric in this thread is interesting but does not seem to mean much unless you, as an individual, define both your requirements and those parameters that you feel are important to good reproduction.
As for solid state verses tubes… well, both have transfer characteristics that can be utilised and manipulated, so to say that one is inherently superior to the other sounds like a load of dogmatic nonsense!
Just my opinion…!
My pet theory says that it should be ‘horses for courses’:
…If you are designing an integrated then make a high gain amp section, use good supplies, and plonk an attenuator at the input.
…If you are designing separate pre and power amps then place the power amps adjacent to the speakers and consider going the ‘whole hog’ by using one power amp per drive unit.
…If you have no need for gain, and if you have no impedance issues, then use an optimised attenuator.
…If you need phono / RIAA equalisation then either place it next to your turntable (best performance) or inside your preamplifier (shares power supply, hence is lower cost).
… etc., etc., etc. …
All of the rhetoric in this thread is interesting but does not seem to mean much unless you, as an individual, define both your requirements and those parameters that you feel are important to good reproduction.
As for solid state verses tubes… well, both have transfer characteristics that can be utilised and manipulated, so to say that one is inherently superior to the other sounds like a load of dogmatic nonsense!
Just my opinion…!
Rhetoric can mean either effective use of language or intellectually vacuous or insincere, as well, several other descriptions.
I am trying to be as clear and sincere as possible.
As for a load of dogmatic nonsense, I can't answer this scientifically-not yet anyway.
As you recall from my opening post, I also expressed my surprise at this, (SS versus tube) just as you have, and I have requested my friend to explain his theory here before a large body of experienced people.
He has agreed to shortly, so we shall see.
One thing that you said, which is really important, was that:
... " unless you, as an individual, define both your requirements and those parameters that you feel are important to good reproduction."
Well said. For me this is the foundation of clear and reasoned thought regarding this subject.
I'm going to devote some time to this and I hope to be clear.
Last edited:
Sorry, I was a bit quick and harsh with those words. I apologise.
I have much to learn and I look forward to reading the thoughts of your friend.
Hi Jen-B:
I also was a bit quick. I'm especially sorry that I caused you to want to apologize.
But, that was very thoughtful and I also have much to learn.
I really am fortunate to have the ears of so many knowledgeable people in my field of interest!
How fortunate we all are - thanks to this site.
Nice to meet you and thanks again for your reply.
Last edited:
A simple attenuator cannot drive cables effectively. So it introduces coloration, in this case an interaction between the attenuator, the cables and the input impedance of the amp. A lot of amps need more than one volt, BTW.
What you're describing is nothing more than moving the preamp inside the CD player. Some gain is needed. The minimalists amongst us would have us remove everything from the system, piece at a time, for the perfect sound is silence.
I wasn't talking about an attenuator in a separate chassis. I was talking about the attenuator and power amplifier being in the same chassis.
Would you not consider this an "integrated"?
Some do. But the majority require less than 2 volts for full rated power.
se
When I look at the transformer test helpfully posted on G Pimms site (click>> Transformer Measurements ) I see a resonably expensive Sowter (type 3575) manages -70 dB at low frequency, whereas the expensive one (type 9100) manages -80 dB.
Is this about par for the course for input transformers? Are better examples available from other suppliers?
Is this about par for the course for input transformers? Are better examples available from other suppliers?
Not at all.
Try a CineMag CMMI-10C hitched to a good solid state follower.
I like tubes for voltage gain over transistors, but like transformers even better.
se
That's about par.
Though don't get too obsessed over THD figures, especially with transformers. Their distortion is rather more benign than with active devices. For a given level of THD, they produce much less IM distortion.
Check out the chapter Bill Whitlock of Jensen wrote for Glenn Ballou's Handbook for Sound Engineers.
Audio Transformers
se
I have nothing against passive components, the question was about which active components are better for preamps.
That's why a saddle on a cow. 😉
I did not know that.
(Yeah, I just spotted it was a 1:10 !)
Thanks for the book chapter link.
What about the proper combination of transformer, tube, and SS? Some people do such things, believe it or not.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.