Modern Linestages


This is a general question about how complex and expensive some linestages have become. I'm looking to understand why? I can grasp that really good volume controls are complicated and that equally good switches are not inexpensive. I also have a general understanding of the importance of a high quality power supply, which again is not going to come cheap. I just don't comprehend how you get to a 50lbs. plus preamps that cost well over $20k. Is this level of complexity really needed or is it the equivalent of the spate of 500hp "sedans" for every day driving?
128x128onhwy61
My preference is for an active preamp but done as simple as possible. I chose CJ's ART and ACT 2.2 for my pres "first" because I like the way they sounded and "second" because of their design: Class A, only one gain stage, no negative feedback, and no cathode follower. For an active tube pre, that's pretty simple.

So here's a case where a pre is simple and expensive. I wondered if it was because they were the companies statement product and, in the ART's case, because only a limited production was made. I'm sure that's part of it but finding that, in the ART 3's case, it uses 32 Teflon caps at a cost of about 300 each. That alone works out to 9000 in just those parts. Does it need all those to work? No. But that was CJ's decision. Do I need to pay that much for a pre? No. But that's my decision.

Hypothetically: If someone was to invent a raw driver that outperforms every other driver in the world and cost 100 in parts....If he puts that into the perfect box that cost him 100 in materials....and if it takes him an hour to assemble it (we'll give him a 100 per hour rate)....Can he charge 300 for it? Can he charge 30,000? Yes and yes. First yes: If he's a Saint. Second yes: If there are people that will buy it at that price. In the latter case, I'm sure some people will wonder why he charges so much. The short answer is, "because he can". A better answer is: "It took years and a lot of money to develop this and I have a family and a business with overhead I have to take care of".
While I understand that passive pres are more system dependent than active pres, I find it interesting that some would suggest that simpler is better and yet choose a system that doesn't maximize the potential for a passive pre.
"08-22-11: "Unsound
While I understand that passive pres are more system dependent than active pres, I find it interesting that some would suggest that simpler is better and yet choose a system that doesn't maximize the potential for a passive pre.Unsound"

You can try this experiment yourself, put your cd straight into your poweramp and play a known quiet starting disc, so you can stop it before it gets too loud.
This is the purest way you will hear that disc, any active pre in the system will sound different to this as no active pre is a straight wire with gain, they all have a signature to their sound, call it coloured, or distortion they all sound different, none sound like the direct conection between the source and poweramp. The passive pre will if implemented right sound the closest and the truest to the source. You may not like that purity of sound, you may wish to introduce an active preamp that gives you the colouration your seeking to counteract a problem elsewhere in the system, but this is an expensive band-aid fix

Cheers George
George you are correct that each active pre brings it's own sound to the stage but let's take it to the next step! Every amp, speaker, cable, line conditioner, room treatment and so on moves one system differently so by going with an active pre vs. a passive is just a different flavor of ice cream. You might like chocolate while I like coffee. As I stated personally I have found passive pre's to sound wonderful but they do have their faults and now use an active pre and have never looked back. Maybe some day I'll have the good fortune to try yours, would love to hear it.
Steve
SOS
The really wonderful aspect of this hobby is the ability to put things to the test.If you trust your ears, you can judge/test the theories and listen to what happens.You can say a good passive is truer to the source and that active devices simply add "colorations"(pleasing or not). You could certainly conclude also that the passive units are`nt passing the"complte" signal,thus there`s some degree of subtraction of musical information.What one person would say is a clean and pure(uncolored) signal is in reality just an incomplete one and thus sounds leaner,flatten,thin and lacks dynamics and vitality. The active unit may just do a superior job of preserving the original signal(less degradation) so that tone and dynamics are`nt as comprrimised. This would explain(at least to me) why the really good active linestages sound more real and involving rather than stripped down and less involving.