Currently running a Grimm Mu1-->MM Tambaqui-->Gryphon Essence--> Rockport Atria ii's. Lovely, fast, transparent sound with great imaging, but issues with dynamics and presence that I believe are due to lack of a pre amp. Have a bit of an oddball lineup, but will be listening to a Grimm Mu2 (driving into amp), Soulution 725. Soulnote P-3, and Thrax Dionysus.
Any predictions on which of these will sound best? Will keep you posted.
Once you've gone full circle with active pre-amps and you're back to no pre-amp is when I suspect you may realize potentially greater and more natural dynamics - which I think I can sufficiently demonstrate with this video. If you give it the juice.
Then again, a lack of dynamics and/or presence is usually the result of numerous shortcomings. IOW, not limited to just linestage type.
My very general take on passive buffered attenuator boxes/TVCs versus active line stage preamps, is that:
-- active preamps provide greater dynamics, but at the cost of transparency compared to passive devices, and
-- it takes a very carefully designed, generally expensive line stage preamp to replicate the transparency of, or close to the transparency of, a passive preamp while still preserving the dynamics benefits of the active amplification device.
In other words a Pareto optimal improvement (at least one sonic attribute is better with no sonic attributes being inferior) active line stage over a passive is expensive.
Currently running a Grimm Mu1-->MM Tambaqui-->Gryphon Essence--> Rockport Atria ii's. Lovely, fast, transparent sound with great imaging, but issues with dynamics and presence that I believe are due to lack of a pre amp. Have a bit of an oddball lineup, but will be listening to a Grimm Mu2 (driving into amp), Soulution 725. Soulnote P-3, and Thrax Dionysus.
Any predictions on which of these will sound best? Will keep you posted.
I like both thrax and Soulution 720 (slightly more than the 725), but Soulution when paired with a valve power amp.
also, with general digital I would prefer the thrax. With good analog recordings, I might prefer the Soulution with a valve power amp to the thrax with cones, though I haven’t done this compare, but since introducing the Soulution 720 in a friend's valve system 5 years ago the quality of analog just zoomed both in showing transparency of changes to recordings and cartridges, and general musical enjoyment. It went from a very mediocre system to one I would not change (and he does not either), with that simple one box addition. In your situation my best bet is the Thrax.
Once you've gone full circle with active pre-amps and you're back to no pre-amp is when I suspect you may realize potentially greater and more natural dynamics - which I think I can sufficiently demonstrate with this video. If you give it the juice.
Then again, a lack of dynamics and/or presence is usually the result of numerous shortcomings. IOW, not limited to just linestage type.
My very general take on passive buffered attenuator boxes/TVCs versus active line stage preamps, is that:
-- active preamps provide greater dynamics, but at the cost of transparency compared to passive devices, and
-- it takes a very carefully designed, generally expensive line stage preamp to replicate the transparency of, or close to the transparency of, a passive preamp while still preserving the dynamics benefits of the active amplification device.
In other words a Pareto optimal improvement (at least one sonic attribute is better with no sonic attributes being inferior) active line stage over a passive is expensive.
I like both thrax and Soulution 720 (slightly more than the 725), but Soulution when paired with a valve power amp.
also, with general digital I would prefer the thrax. With good analog recordings, I might prefer the Soulution with a valve power amp to the thrax with cones, though I haven’t done this compare, but since introducing the Soulution 720 in a friend's valve system 5 years ago the quality of analog just zoomed both in showing transparency of changes to recordings and cartridges, and general musical enjoyment. It went from a very mediocre system to one I would not change (and he does not either), with that simple one box addition. In your situation my best bet is the Thrax.
in a valve based system that preamp is highly transparent to recordings. Very see through. There is no loss of valve magic with the phono and preamp being valves, there is a gain in see- throughness and clarity. I don’t like Soulution with Soulution. It might not apply to you as you are digital only
My very general take on passive buffered attenuator boxes/TVCs versus active line stage preamps, is that:
-- active preamps provide greater dynamics, but at the cost of transparency compared to passive devices, and
-- it takes a very carefully designed, generally expensive line stage preamp to replicate the transparency of, or close to the transparency of, a passive preamp while still preserving the dynamics benefits of the active amplification device.
In other words a Pareto optimal improvement (at least one sonic attribute is better with no sonic attributes being inferior) active line stage over a passive is expensive.
Interesting take, Ron. Without going into detail my general take is pretty much the opposite as I cannot think of a single attribute about the electronics-induced dynamics resulting from an active pre-amp or any of the nasties associated with those dynamics that’s worth preserving. And in comparison to the potentially more naturally musical alternative, I would steer clear of any designer consciously attempting to preserve any such thing.
Did you find the dynamics from my video above lacking?
Hey, chet. This "Dynamic Drums" track is from a Legacy Audio sampler CD #1. They had two and both contain some interesting pieces - including this one.
I can't tell anything material from a digital video of an unfamiliar track played on an unfamiliar system in an unfamiliar room.
With big, tall speakers with big woofers and lots of driver surface area and big subwoofers (all of which I happen to like), if I were in front of your system in person I am sure I would not find dynamics lacking. But that's not the question.
The question would be comparing in your system your favorite passive device to somebody's favorite active device.
My very general take on passive buffered attenuator boxes/TVCs versus active line stage preamps, is that:
-- active preamps provide greater dynamics, but at the cost of transparency compared to passive devices, and
-- it takes a very carefully designed, generally expensive line stage preamp to replicate the transparency of, or close to the transparency of, a passive preamp while still preserving the dynamics benefits of the active amplification device.
In other words a Pareto optimal improvement (at least one sonic attribute is better with no sonic attributes being inferior) active line stage over a passive is expensive.
100% agree with this. The least expensive active preamp I've heard that provides sonic benefits that may outperform the slight loss of immediacy and transparency is the Denafrips Athena ($2,200 USD). An active preamp that can be as immediate and transparent as a passive and provide additional benefits for me generally starts at about $5K USD.
I predict the Soul Note might win your heart over the others
I have owned both passive and active. My system has evolved since the time of owning the passive. At the time I found passive thin. Maybe its added euphorics or distortions, but I like the more full and powerfull active sound. I'm not going to worry its not as pure and direct. When I'm listening to music I want to enjoy the music. I don't want to worry about the process of how the sound came to be.
My very general take on passive buffered attenuator boxes/TVCs versus active line stage preamps, is that:
-- active preamps provide greater dynamics, but at the cost of transparency compared to passive devices, and
-- it takes a very carefully designed, generally expensive line stage preamp to replicate the transparency of, or close to the transparency of, a passive preamp while still preserving the dynamics benefits of the active amplification device.
In other words a Pareto optimal improvement (at least one sonic attribute is better with no sonic attributes being inferior) active line stage over a passive is expensive.
100% agree with this. The least expensive active preamp I've heard that provides sonic benefits that may outperform the slight loss of immediacy and transparency is the Denafrips Athena ($2,200 USD). An active preamp that can be as immediate and transparent as a passive and provide additional benefits for me generally starts at about $5K USD.
I predict the Soul Note might win your heart over the others
They way I see preamp and rest of the system in music chain is like this. The steamer, DAC, amps and speakers are like the science behind the music and the preamp is the actual "Art" of the system, giving a bit of form and character. In other ways, preamp (especially active preamp) is like the heart that gives/adds emotions like no other chain/components. Like a chef who gives flavor using the ingredients.
I have had few preamps in my system and you should try Aries Cerat preamps (even their reference grade- I have incito S: are phenomenal). Best of luck in your search.
