Passive Preamps

Larry, I have the H2O and Fire preamp. My sound went from edgy and bright, to soft and warm, to just plain natural. These changes occurred while using the same power source. The builder ob both the Fire and the H2O as a much inferior source than I. He has never heard the full potential his gear is capable of. My findings show me his gear just gets better with every positive system change I make. The question is, how did he know which way to design the Fire preamp without knowing it's potential? He knows, because he has an intimate knowledge of all components that goes into making amps. My system is proof supreme knowledge trumps the ear when making judgement calls for excellent designers.

Tvad,

I was qualifying my comment from a 'measurements' perspective (reproducing a signal) - what sounds best with the gear each of us happen to own and our individual tastes will no doubt differ... I hope we can agree on that.

10-10-09: Shadorne
Tvad,

I was qualifying my comment from a 'measurements' perspective
(reproducing a signal) -

I understand. My comment to you had nothing to do with personal
preference.

As designer of audiophile equipment, I am fairly certain Steve McCormack
measures his components on the test bench.

A debate between you two on the topic would be entertaining.

I've used both over the years (active/passive). I haven't found an active preamp that betters a passive volume control at the lower price points....$1,000 active VS $1,000 passive.

Once you get past around $2,000 or so...I'll normally drop the passive idea as a replacement for an active preamp....the active almost always wins in my experience.

Dave

10-10-09: Tvad
Tholt, my point was that you are not necessarily 1 against 3. I think Lrsky
knows what he's talking about when it comes to audio, yet I don't presently
subscribe to his general recommendation of an active preamp over a passive
preamp, and I was using my situation to explain why this is so.

I thought my post was supportive of your use of a passive, but perhaps I
misunderstood something in your string of posts.

No worries. The real (and only) point was related to Phaelon citing you agreeing with Lrsky in a completely different thread to back up his own agreement with him here. Which struck me as funny.