Tube buffer or tube preamp


Why people use a tube buffer when he can replace a ss preamp for a tube preamp.

Personnaly my system is all solid state and i want to get out some harshness so a have to make a choice between the two options.

thank you
128x128thenis
Yeah, fix the problem....
Spend a few tens-of thousands to fix it. Then discover it still sucks. LOL
Or get the band aide.
My band aide cost me $1,400 and I am happy as can be.
Now can you say that?

I get annoyed with theory crap. "In theory you should blah blah blah.. Screw theory. Do what works.
Tube amplification is tube ampification. Buffer, preamp, doesn't really matter as long as done well and has synergy with the rest. Both can yield results ranging from really good to poor. Ic used with separate buffer will matter also.
I definitely agree that adding another piece of equipment to mask the problem makes no sense, as it would be better to just eliminate the source of harshness, although it may be a more difficult task. Also, changing to a tube preamp will definitely sound different, however, if the preamp is not the problem, it may just mask the harshness like a tube buffer. I have to ask at what point did this harshness begin? Can you recall an equipment change when it started, or has it always been there? If it resulted from a change, then focus your efforts there. If itÂ’s always been there, then I would start with the source components. Have you tried a CD player only, rather than transport and DAC? Is your digital cable extremely short or at least 1.5 meters in length to help minimize jitter? I helped a friend audition many digital cables in varying lengths and types. Results ranged from very smooth and laid back to bright, harsh, and forward. I have also tried different CD players (SS and tube) in my system, and found that some tubes can even sound harsh.
Spend a few tens-of thousands to fix it. Then discover it still sucks.
Anyone that throws expensive components and cables at a system to solve a problem is foolish, and should just get out of the hobby. Also, solving the problem correctly allows for greater benefit in future upgrades.
Thenis, to your question: "Why people use a tube buffer when he can replace a ss preamp for a tube preamp."

I did it to maintain functionality of my pre/pro for HT/surround application, while enhancing 2-channel experience. I had Joseph Chow of Audio Horizons custom build a combination tube buffer and phono preamp into one box. It's in front of Class D mono's and as Elizabeth said, it works for me. At some point if/when I go to straight 2-channel, then a tube preamp with phono stage might be the way to go.

BTW, I believe Audio Horizons still offers in-home audition. So why not find out how it sounds in your home and with your system? FWIW, I started out with the Yaqin small buffer, then upgraded to Musical Fidelity X10v3. In my humble opinion, compared to the AH TB series, they're not in the same class. Good luck and Happy Listening!
Without pregidous, buffers are usfull if there's an impedence mismatch.

It may appear your pre is outclassed by the rest of your system, you could beg or borrow other species of preamps perhaps Pass or even Moon which may give you synergy or ARC or Vac on the other side to find the forgiveness with resolution you seek.

Adding more components like a buffer is oportunity to introduce more colouration and distotion not to mention the added cost of another cable.

Shorest signal paths, quality parts well implemented . The devil is in the detail.

I'm sure there are other valid opinions, but I would prefer to weed out the offensive component than to upholster over it.

All The Best.