SS Preamp with Tube Amp?

The reason I would still choose a SS pre over a tube pre (even assuming the highest quality of either) is because to me, transistors are the device of choice for handling very small/weak signals. There are a number of different reason I feel this way including:

>> transistors don't change their behavior over time
>> transistors don't require large power supplies (compared to a similar tube unit)
>> transistors (except power output transistors) don't generate much heat (which can affect other electronic parts)
>> transistors don't produce electron "rush" (tube noise) which in a low level device like a preamp is bound to be amplified. Tube noise and tape hiss is why Dolby Laboratories was born ;-)

Preamps don't generally amplify the signal. They just select it, balance it, and attenuate it (reduce it's strength) when you don't want to play the music loud.

One kind of preamp that DOES amplify is a phono preamp. And in most cases, it also provides RIAA equalization to reduce record surface noise and strengthen the high frequencies. Frankly, I'm divided on this one. On one hand, I like tube PHONO preamps because you can mess with the tubes ;-) On the other hand, they DO make noise, and what I really dislike is the fact that if you want enough gain for MC cartridges, you almost always have to use a step-up transformer before the preamp; and I really dislike those! Transistor phono preamps can deliver plenty of noise-free gain, even for the lowest output MC cartridges. But you can't "roll" transistors; so if you want to tailor the sonics, why you're just SOL ;-)
.

"But you can't "roll" transistors; so if you want to tailor the sonics, why you're just SOL ;-)"

An undeniable benefit of tubes. Getting it right is all about tailoring sonics somehow more so than which piece is better than others, although some undeniably are better.

Like baking a cake. You need a good recipe to tell you how to properly combine the ingredients, but quality ingredients are needed for best results.

Mapman, you understood I was talking about phono preamps right? With regular preamps, tube rolling generally doesn't seem to have much effect on sonics, compared to tube rolling in amps, so I tend to lean toward SS for those. Now of course if someone allowed me to audition a Nick Doshi, or perhaps the new CAT, or a Calypso, I might give in ;--)

As noted by others, there have been a lot of threads on this subject and you should research them.

Truly good sounding solid-state preamps, which is to say, the ones that do not sound "solid-state", tend to be very expensive, and I agree with the above poster that it is a lot easier to get a good sounding tube preamp at a given price point than solid-state. Most importantly, tube preamps layer space better than most solid-state preamps.

That said, the very best solid-state preamps layer space just as well as tube preamps. They are also quieter, and this to me is crucial - tube pre's obscure detail compared to the better solid-state preamps because of the greater noise levels generated by small-signal tubes. A preamp sends a signal that is amplified many times by the amplifier - if the signal received from the preamp at an amp's inputs is noisy to begin with, noise levels become quickly audible. In a high-resolution system, a solid-state preamp allows a listener to hear deeper, and with the best SS pre's, a lot deeper, into recordings.

Except for those that are output transformer coupled (most are not), tube preamps have high-ish output impedances and often have bass rolloff problems with amps having low input impedances, compromising compatibility. They also tend to have trouble driving long (>2 M.) interconnects, again limiting compatibility. The only inconvenience I have encountered with SS pre's concerns powering them down for electrical storms - tube preamps come back to life within a few hours, while a solid-state pre's need a lot longer.

Turning to your specific question, the issue with running a solid-state preamp with a tube preamp again comes back to cost. Just as it takes a very good (and thus very $$$) solid-state preamp to get past solid-state preamp problems, it likewise takes a lot of money to get into a tube amp that does not have typical tube amp problems, specifically, an inability to control woofers and non-linear frequency response due to impedance issues with dynamic (cone) loudspeakers - the amp has to have massive power supplies and most importantly, really good output transformers, which are really expensive. In the alternative, you can get a hell of a lot of performance from a relatively moderate-cost combo like an Audible Illusions 3A tube preamp with a Bryston or McCormack SS amp.

At the top end of the market, however, a solid-state pre is the way to go in my opinion. I run a very quiet solid-state preamp (battery powered, fully differential balanced Rowland Coherence II) with either solid-state (darTZeel) or triode tube (VAC Renaissance 70/70) amplifiers. The Rowland's output impedance is a really low 50 Ohms, which can even drive the darTZeel through its 50 Ohm input. My backup preamp is a solid-state ARC LS-3. I've owned some pretty decent tube preamps (Jadis, Hovland, CAT), I've heard many others, and love what they do well, but believe that, generally speaking, very high-end solid-state is best at the preamplification stage with either tube or solid-state amplification.

Put Klyne on the list for consideration;Stan's pre amps are highly regarded and build quality is first class;only I think you need to get off the couch,no remote as I recall
unless he has one in the works;been a while.