Pubul57 - Seems I have written pages :-) on this yet no understanding of my point? It may be impossible and that's OK!
A "direct connection" as you say, is as I say, just another STEREO SYSTEM and produces a sound of its own. Direct connection from CD player to amp is not, as another has stated here, the GOLD STANDARD, it is simply another way to hear music out of a stereo system. A CD player driving amps is still a stereo system that does or does not reproduce the voice or instrument accurately to the recording or live event. The END result (sound) of a system is the proof. I and others suggest a passive unit "can" or "sometimes" can, depending on the total system, fail to pass along the recording with a sound that is true to the source. This can also be true of an active unit.
Many folks far more educated then me on audio circuits and recording practices will wax poetically why DAC's/CD players etc.. are an insufficient means to pass along the signal to an amp with only a passive in the chain. Meaning the resulting sound may lack in areas as the system simply lacks the horsepower needed to convey the energy and space of live music and great recordings. I don't want to argue that and all the math and audio geek talk that goes with it. I do know what I hear however in my system. It is not added coloration; it is in fact hearing MORE of the recording as intended with my active in place.
One reason may be as simple as my active Dude preamp has all the lows, all the highs, all the transparency, and depth of field and soundstage width simply because it actually amplifies ALL that is there and does not mask as has been implied. Amplifying the low-level stuff, stuff that might not get through (stage depth & other nuances) is important and not insignificant as we know. Is it possible a great active can get more of this information by way of design then a passive? At least as much? Seems reasonable to me.
Just trying for us to see with a broader view that sweeping comments about one type of design being the GOLD STANDARD may be a little narrow?
Next please….
A "direct connection" as you say, is as I say, just another STEREO SYSTEM and produces a sound of its own. Direct connection from CD player to amp is not, as another has stated here, the GOLD STANDARD, it is simply another way to hear music out of a stereo system. A CD player driving amps is still a stereo system that does or does not reproduce the voice or instrument accurately to the recording or live event. The END result (sound) of a system is the proof. I and others suggest a passive unit "can" or "sometimes" can, depending on the total system, fail to pass along the recording with a sound that is true to the source. This can also be true of an active unit.
Many folks far more educated then me on audio circuits and recording practices will wax poetically why DAC's/CD players etc.. are an insufficient means to pass along the signal to an amp with only a passive in the chain. Meaning the resulting sound may lack in areas as the system simply lacks the horsepower needed to convey the energy and space of live music and great recordings. I don't want to argue that and all the math and audio geek talk that goes with it. I do know what I hear however in my system. It is not added coloration; it is in fact hearing MORE of the recording as intended with my active in place.
One reason may be as simple as my active Dude preamp has all the lows, all the highs, all the transparency, and depth of field and soundstage width simply because it actually amplifies ALL that is there and does not mask as has been implied. Amplifying the low-level stuff, stuff that might not get through (stage depth & other nuances) is important and not insignificant as we know. Is it possible a great active can get more of this information by way of design then a passive? At least as much? Seems reasonable to me.
Just trying for us to see with a broader view that sweeping comments about one type of design being the GOLD STANDARD may be a little narrow?
Next please….