Any Passive Pre Users?

organ

Anybody else here using passive pre's?
I have an ASL transformer based passive pre that I had completely forgotten about for like 3 years lol.
Been listening to the rig with it and the sound is very impressive. This is the first time I heard this pre using my current combination of equipments.
I'm experiencing a completely different audio matrix. It's doing a lot of good stuff that I've never experienced with active pre amps.
The sound is less mechanical and a lot more organic. Everything has more body to it (vocals, intruments, drums, etc) and there is this warmth that sounds so natural. There is a better sense of the artists being in the same room. The presentation is very dynamic.
I feel like all the active pre amps I've have some sort of glare that wasn't noticable until I used the passive.
The two things that I really like about it is when the dynamics build up, the sound gets bigger and louder while the soundstage remains in the same spot. With my active pre's it's more like the sound just gets louder and the soundstage gets pushed forward.
And finally, I really like the PRAT. Everything has more snap and the attack is much sharper.

I'm really enjoying this set up and feel I need to listen to all my cd's again. With passive being cheaper than active, I'm surprised they're not that popular.

So if anybody else are using passives, please share your experience and list qualities about them that you really like.

pietro944

organ wrote: »

Anybody else here using passive pre's?
I have an ASL transformer based passive pre that I had completely forgotten about for like 3 years lol.
Been listening to the rig with it and the sound is very impressive. This is the first time I heard this pre using my current combination of equipments.
I'm experiencing a completely different audio matrix. It's doing a lot of good stuff that I've never experienced with active pre amps.
The sound is less mechanical and a lot more organic. Everything has more body to it (vocals, intruments, drums, etc) and there is this warmth that sounds so natural. There is a better sense of the artists being in the same room. The presentation is very dynamic.
I feel like all the active pre amps I've have some sort of glare that wasn't noticable until I used the passive.
The two things that I really like about it is when the dynamics build up, the sound gets bigger and louder while the soundstage remains in the same spot. With my active pre's it's more like the sound just gets louder and the soundstage gets pushed forward.
And finally, I really like the PRAT. Everything has more snap and the attack is much sharper.

I'm really enjoying this set up and feel I need to listen to all my cd's again. With passive being cheaper than active, I'm surprised they're not that popular.

So if anybody else are using passives, please share your experience and list qualities about them that you really like.

Funny you should bring this up......I've been researching this.....I saw this one on ebay:Tisbury Audio Dual Mono Stepped Attentuator Passive Preamp....Beautifull,minimilist pre from the UK...I'm still researching the input/output voltage explanation(I'm using a Yaqin Tube Buffer) into a Pio Elite Recvr),also have a seperate 2 ch amp......What pre are you using? and do you have a pic?....peter

mhardy6647

Roger that. Using an AVC made from Dave Slagle's parts and a source selector in a little metal box with two black plastic knobs.
http://www.intactaudio.com/

pietro944

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Roger that. Using an AVC made from Dave Slagle's parts and a source selector in a little metal box with two black plastic knobs.
http://www.intactaudio.com/

nice......is that the Zhalou 2.5 Dac on top?......I have that also,but don't use it anymore sice i upgraded...I'll post a link to the tisbury on ebay(as soon as I stop **** up the link(lol).......they have beautifull photos....peter

soundfreak1

with help from fellow polkies 4 skimatics had my technician build a passive pre actully a passive volume attenuator. 2rca inputs one output, a a/b selector one risistor and 2 ALPS vol.attenuarors (using 2 acts like a balance control) . sounds better than any active solid state pre I've ever heard. on my main system I still use my dared tube pre. But i switch it out once im a while in my main system and it sounds fantastic no color to the music just clean clear and crisp. Less warm little more forward then the tubes. I use it full time on my second system and I'll probably never change it. cost me a whole 30 dollars in parts.i feel a true passive allows u to hear just the amp! Without any coloring of the music by the pre. And of u have a great sounding amp it will sound great. If not it will reveal that too.

organ

Peter,
Sounds interesting. British stuff are very good.
I'm using an Antique Sound Lab Passive T-TX DT.

MHardy,
Very cool. Nice 300B amp down there.

Soundfreak,
Thanks for sharing your experience. I still haven't had the chance to try pot based passive. Great to hear it sounds that good.
I also see some manufacturers make them with a tube buffer built in. Looks interesting.


I'm really sorry about the pic quality. It's from my phone.

Gaara

I use TVCs in both my systems. Love that these sound the same at any volume level. Wouldn't go back to active, as it would be a downgrade.

If you haven't ever tried passives it is definitely something to look into. The ultimate in transparency

.

steveinaz

I use a Placette passive, love it.

lanchile

I am a lover of the passive pre-amps. My diy integrated amp is a passive.Attachment not found.Attachment not found.

http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oG7iFHnoFP8BwAC5tXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE1a3VmOXRuBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkA1JDRjAzM18yMzk-/SIG=1204lvsc0/EXP=1333923527/**http%3a//www.dact.com/html/passive_preamp.html

heiney9

My Adcom GFP-750 is switchable between active and passive. I like active for most things, but I do use the passive occasionally with great results. This is when I'm not running my tube pre-amp.

H9

Drenis

What exactly are the main differences between passive and active pre-amps

TSWisla

I recently dumped my GFP-750 which I was running in passive for an all phono setup. I now run my phono pre directly into the amp. I have no idea why I kept the GFP this long, it was pointless...

Face

Using a Wyred 4 Sound STP-SE, which is passive throughout most of the volume range except for the very last few steps.

http://www.wyred4sound.com/webapps/p/74030/117839/364714

FTGV

I'm using a 10K NOBLE pot in one of my rigs with excellent results.

Drenis wrote: »

What exactly are the main differences between passive and active pre-amps

Passive does not contain any active circuit gain stages ie.opamps,transistors etc.

Drenis

FTGV wrote: »

Passive does not contain any active circuit gain stages ie.opamps,transistors etc.

Thanks for the info. I can see why Passive is somewhat favored now; Less circuits for the sound to travel through. Clean direct signal path.

heiney9

Drenis wrote: »

Thanks for the info. I can see why Passive is somewhat favored now; Less circuits for the sound to travel through. Clean direct signal path.

Also be aware passive isn't always better. It's very system dependent and source dependent. Not all active pre's are created equal and not all passive type pre's are created equal. Many times it takes careful matching to get the correct synergy.

H9

soundfreak1

Ftgv said it right. I have found with the dozen or so preamps I have owned, they all change the sound to one point or another. some good some bad yes better than others. he passive attenuator just stepped out of the way completely as far as color or tinting the music amd allows the amp do its thing comtrolling the gain only. Thus the quality of the sound does not change with volume it just gets louder or softer but the dynamics in the quality of the sound remains pretty much the same. that's what I like I device 4 the most.

strider

I took my tube pre out recently and replaced it with a passive FirstWatt B1 clone. Have mine set up with 2 inputs and 2 outputs, although I think I'll redo the inputs to allow another source. One output powers a FirstWatt F5 clone, kinda locking in the synergy thing. The other output feeds an active crossover.

I prefer the passive in my current set up, it seems to get out of the way and let the music happen, if that makes any sense. As Brock said, they're system dependent. Short interconnects are a must, sources with suitable voltage output as well. My DAC outputs 2.5v, cd player is in the same range. Not certain of my Bugle phone pre output, but the volume is similar compared to the other sources. I like simple circuits overall, let a bad recording screw up the experience, I say!

steveinaz

Drenis wrote: »

What exactly are the main differences between passive and active pre-amps

About 10lbs of eletronics, out of the way of your signal. Seriously though, an active pre applies some pre-amplification--a passive does not.

The most significant element of a passive (IMO) is, as others have stated, their ability to remain extremely linear, even at high volumes. The sound (scale) just gets larger and larger, with no particular freq's being pushed forward. Very clean, linear, and neutral. I have also found treble to be reproduced better than any active I've ever owned.

My own personal philosophy on hi-fi is simplicity, and minimal electronics to get the job done; and...speakers, speakers, speakers. 50-75% of your systems value should be in your speakers--again, IMO.

cnh

I sometimes use a Nakamichi CA-5 (which I assume is Passive--nothing beyond source selector, balance and volume controls) which I switch out between a NAD 214 and an Adcom GFA-545. It doesn't seem to add much to the actual sound of the amp so you can hear the difference between the two if you listen closely.

Really depends on what speakers I want to run. If they're a little bright, NAD. If they're laid back, Adcom. It's good to have "options"!

cnh

FTGV

The CA5 is an active preamp since it has transistors in the signal path providing gain.A passive preamp will have no active decives such tubes, transistors or opamps in their signal paths to buffer or provide gain.

Drenis

steveinaz wrote: »

About 10lbs of eletronics, out of the way of your signal. Seriously though, an active pre applies some pre-amplification--a passive does not.

The most significant element of a passive (IMO) is, as others have stated, their ability to remain extremely linear, even at high volumes. The sound (scale) just gets larger and larger, with no particular freq's being pushed forward. Very clean, linear, and neutral. I have also found treble to be reproduced better than any active I've ever owned.

My own personal philosophy on hi-fi is simplicity, and minimal electronics to get the job done; and...speakers, speakers, speakers. 50-75% of your systems value should be in your speakers--again, IMO.

Thanks for the reply Steve. It certainly educates me on considerations when it comes time to upgrade.

heiney9

steveinaz wrote: »

About 10lbs of eletronics, out of the way of your signal. Seriously though, an active pre applies some pre-amplification--a passive does not.

The most significant element of a passive (IMO) is, as others have stated, their ability to remain extremely linear, even at high volumes. The sound (scale) just gets larger and larger, with no particular freq's being pushed forward. Very clean, linear, and neutral. I have also found treble to be reproduced better than any active I've ever owned.

My own personal philosophy on hi-fi is simplicity, and minimal electronics to get the job done; and...speakers, speakers, speakers. 50-75% of your systems value should be in your speakers--again, IMO.

To be fair there are some active pre's that are extremely linear, clean and dead neutral, of course they don't come cheap. It's a preference and it's very gear centric as a passive will not always work in realty vs. in theory. Experimentation in YOUR rig is the key.

soundfreak1

I truly love the sound of the dared produces( once the tubes were upgraded to the telefunken tubes. they seem to be more linear than most tubes and still give me the warmth i like. that would you consider I have 600 + dollars in the dared with the cost of the t.ubes 30 bucks in parts for the passive attenuator it's very hard to beat.

cnh

FTGV wrote: »

The CA5 is an active preamp since it has transistors in the signal path providing gain.A passive preamp will have no active decives such tubes, transistors or opamps in their signal paths to buffer or provide gain.

Yeah, that's why I hesitated above. Wasn't really sure about that. But it is fairly linear, as Brock describes, at least.

So here's a question, if there is no 'gain' how does the "volume" control on a passive pre-amp work? I'm not quite clear on that? As they say, "when in doubt, don't be afraid to ask"!

cnh

FTGV

cnh wrote: »

So here's a question, if there is no 'gain' how does the "volume" control on a passive amp work. I'm not quite clear on that?

cnh

It merely serves as an attenuator to reduce the voltage output coming from the source component.The source is providing all the gain the passive pre, be it a potentiometer or stepped attenuator switch, merely regulates how much signal goes to the amp.

mhardy6647

way late responses to a couple of questions/comments (FWIW and not entirely on-topic)

1) The DAC is (or perhaps "was" is a better choice of verb tense) a ZhaoLu - significantly tweaked by local hifi guru Kevin Kennedy.
2) The amp is actually the JE Labs/Angela "Simple 2A3" design - the outputs are the Sophia branded (Chinese) "2A3" mesh plates. These tubes are, indeed, essentially 300Bs... but with 2.5 V filaments.

pietro944

mhardy6647 wrote: »

way late responses to a couple of questions/comments (FWIW and not entirely on-topic)

1) The DAC is (or perhaps "was" is a better choice of verb tense) a ZhaoLu - significantly tweaked by local hifi guru Kevin Kennedy.
2) The amp is actually the JE Labs/Angela "Simple 2A3" design - the outputs are the Sophia branded (Chinese) "2A3" mesh plates. These tubes are, indeed, essentially 300Bs... but with 2.5 V filaments.

I use the Zhalou as my headphone amp.only.I originally paid $50 extra for the discrete headphone section.I hook my Yaqin cd3 tube buffer with Raytheon 6sn7GT-VT-231 Black Plate tubes via analog to it.....with my AKG 701's,the sound is just,simply,extraordinary....peter

maximillian

Anyone ever done any passive pre that has a remote control to it? I would think an easy project would be to use something like a digital potentiometer tied to a microcontroller for control. The micro would also read from a universal remote for the user interface.

http://www.intersil.com/data/fn/fn8178.pdf

I actually worked with this chip in a previous job for doing basic audio control, so could make one if I had time. Yet I would think there are good DIY kits out there already.

txcoastal1

Are there issues that can come up when impedance matching components

mhardy6647

pietro944 wrote: »

I use the Zhalou as my headphone amp.only.I originally paid $50 extra for the discrete headphone section.I hook my Yaqin cd3 tube buffer with Raytheon 6sn7GT-VT-231 Black Plate tubes via analog to it.....with my AKG 701's,the sound is just,simply,extraordinary....peter

The headphone amp in mine has been permanently ablated :-P

EDIT: Oh, and just to be clear. One gives up, for better or for worse, two things with a "passive preamp" - gain and impedance matching (buffering)*. If you need either of these two things between your source(s) and your power amp, a passive preamp is probably not for you.

* Oh... OK... technically, you give up three things: gain, impedance matching and EQ (e.g., an RIAA network to play modern records in a phono preamp, or even just "tone controls").