Topping Pre90 Review (preamplifier)

[misterdog]

Try Topping direct ?

 

[superuser]

Hello all, I have a few questions about my setup. The builder of my amp mentioned that they really benefit from a preamp, so I picked up the Pre90. I am trying to figure out how much gain to run and, if possible, what voltage the Pre90 sends out.

My DAC is a Holo Cyan2 outputting DSD over the XLR. I think this = 2.50Vrms(XLR). I read on the review that when using XLR, the Pre90 is unity gain at -6dB. So when I am using the Pre90 set to -6dB, is it passing through 2.50Vrms? If I put the Pre90 volume to +3dB for an increase of 9dB, do you have any idea what the output voltage would be going to the amp? I have a cheap multimeter that only goes down to 200V, so I don't think I can measure it.

Also, I am using HQPlayer, and its volume is set to -6dB, so I am losing a bit there, too.

 

[p_stefan98]

I’ve been eyeing the Pre90 for awhile. I want to connect it up to my Sabaj a20d 2022. Reason being is I need more inputs.

Would I notice a performance increase compared to the built in preamp function on the DAC?

 

[gebeege1]

I have the Truth preamp which was poorly reviewed here. I have to say that I've been very happy with it. In my system, to my ears, it sounds great. (Shiit Yggy DAC, Premaluna Dialogue Premium amps driving AudioPhysic Avanti III's.

On the basis of the stellar measurements of the Pre90 I bought one. I was keen to see if measurements matter. I agree with at least one post here; the Pre90 sounds flat and lacks dynamics. I'd add that, in my system it sounds veiled. The Truth provides a greater sense of realism; the instruments sound more like, well, instruments! One of the suggestions in the review of the Pre90 was that it is a near perfect instrument. It might be. But, for SQ, I'll stick with The Truth. I'll continue to let my ears guide me. After all, after 45 years of training, they are highly refined instruments ;-)

 

[Beave]

I have the Truth preamp which was poorly reviewed here. I have to say that I've been very happy with it. In my system, to my ears, it sounds great. (Shiit Yggy DAC, Premaluna Dialogue Premium amps driving AudioPhysic Avanti III's.

On the basis of the stellar measurements of the Pre90 I bought one. I was keen to see if measurements matter. I agree with at least one post here; the Pre90 sounds flat and lacks dynamics. I'd add that, in my system it sounds veiled. The Truth provides a greater sense of realism; the instruments sound more like, well, instruments! One of the suggestions in the review of the Pre90 was that it is a near perfect instrument. It might be. But, for SQ, I'll stick with The Truth. I'll continue to let my ears guide me. After all, after 45 years of training, they are highly refined instruments ;-)

How did you ensure levels were precisely matched when you switched between the two preamps?

How did you set up the comparison so that switching between the two units was nearly instantaneous?

Did you bother to implement the control known as "blinding," so that you didn't know which you were listening to?

If not, your ears didn't guide you. Your brain did. And ears don't magically improve with 45 years of training. Quite the opposite, they worsen over time.

 

[gebeege1]

How did you ensure levels were precisely matched when you switched between the two preamps?

How did you set up the comparison so that switching between the two units was nearly instantaneous?

Did you bother to implement the control known as "blinding," so that you didn't know which you were listening to?

If not, your ears didn't guide you. Your brain did. And ears don't magically improve with 45 years of training. Quite the opposite, they worsen over time.

Play white noise and adjust volume to 80db for each unit.

Close as you can get without a dedicated swich. Had to change the output cables from one to the other only.

No, not really practical at home! Rather, I repeatedly swithed back and forth over several days after living with the Pre90 for a few weeks. I wanted the Pre90 to be better, that's why I bought it. In fact, at first, prior to being more methodical doing the comparison, I did think it was good... but eventually, I realised I was missing "something".

You're splitting hairs (!) Obviously my ears and brain work together. My HEARING has been refined over the decades. (And yes, that includes loss - but logically that loss applies to both pre's )

 

[Beave]

Matching levels like that isn't sufficiently precise. You could easily be off by a full dB or two. It needs to be done with test tones and electrical measurements for better precision.

Try again with precise level matching, quick switching, and blinding so that you don't know which you are listening to. You might be surprised at the results.

 

[gebeege1]

Matching levels like that isn't sufficiently precise. You could easily be off by a full dB or two. It needs to be done with test tones and electrical measurements for better precision.

Try again with precise level matching, quick switching, and blinding so that you don't know which you are listening to. You might be surprised at the results.

I might be surprised, but I doubt it. It's quite a bit of trouble (skills I don't have) and $ to do what you're suggesting. If you're in Ballarat, Australia, and want to bring the necessary gear over and play... Also, as already noted, when I was listening to the Pre90, for weeks continuously, no matter what I played at any level, there was something missing. The something became apparent doing the back-to-back comparison. It was chalk and cheese.

 

[fred38]

I have the Truth preamp which was poorly reviewed here. I have to say that I've been very happy with it. In my system, to my ears, it sounds great. (Shiit Yggy DAC, Premaluna Dialogue Premium amps driving AudioPhysic Avanti III's.

On the basis of the stellar measurements of the Pre90 I bought one. I was keen to see if measurements matter. I agree with at least one post here; the Pre90 sounds flat and lacks dynamics. I'd add that, in my system it sounds veiled. The Truth provides a greater sense of realism; the instruments sound more like, well, instruments! One of the suggestions in the review of the Pre90 was that it is a near perfect instrument. It might be. But, for SQ, I'll stick with The Truth. I'll continue to let my ears guide me. After all, after 45 years of training, they are highly refined instruments ;-)

I agree with you, I noticed the same thing a few months ago. I didn't keep it.

 

[misterdog]

there was something missing

Noise and distortion.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

there was something missing

Welcome to ASR.

The difference between the two devices, objectively, is that the device you prefer is noisier and distorts.

There's some evidence that quite a few people PREFER music where noise or distortion has been added. Both noise and distortion have been known to increase the sense of "more detail", although in practice they are actually masking detail.

In other words, there are people who prefer noisy distorted music over music that is accurately reproduced.

 

[phoenixsong]

Also, every other component should be measurably transparent if you're trying to compare the audible differences, if any, between the two preamps. Sometimes, the combined artefacts from multiple poor-measuring equipment can actually compensate one another and synergize in a way to sound somewhat pleasant (albeit not transparent) due to reasons others have mentioned above, while swapping out a single component in such a set up for a well-measured one would instead ruin the unstable equilibrium which had been painstakingly and fortuitously attained beforehand.

Personally, I rather save myself the headache of this unreliable and unaccounted for balancing act and simply implement transparent gear throughout the system, beginning with the upstream ones. In my relatively short experience so far since 2013 with all kinds of transducers and sources, my still young ears have never been let down by such a system

 

[gebeege1]

Welcome to ASR.

The difference between the two devices, objectively, is that the device you prefer is noisier and distorts.

There's some evidence that quite a few people PREFER music where noise or distortion has been added. Both noise and distortion have been known to increase the sense of "more detail", although in practice they are actually masking detail.

In other words, there are people who prefer noisy distorted music over music that is accurately reproduced.

I agree that we are talking about preferences. Yes, I definatley prefer The Truth. Whether this is a function of distortion is moot as you cannot seperate out other vaiables. For example, I'm not convinced "synergy" is simply a balancing of nice noise and distortion. And that's not to start with "distortion" throughout the recording chain (and with electric instruments, their distortion).

Also, there's a bias here. You assume that The Truth must be a problem; have you done the comparision I've done? And, are you assuming that measurements = truth?

 

[gebeege1]

Also, every other component should be measurably transparent if you're trying to compare the audible differences, if any, between the two preamps. Sometimes, the combined artefacts from multiple poor-measuring equipment can actually compensate one another and synergize in a way to sound somewhat pleasant (albeit not transparent) due to reasons others have mentioned above, while swapping out a single component in such a set up for a well-measured one would instead ruin the unstable equilibrium which had been painstakingly and fortuitously attained beforehand.

Personally, I rather save myself the headache of this unreliable and unaccounted for balancing act and simply implement transparent gear throughout the system, beginning with the upstream ones. In my relatively short experience so far since 2013 with all kinds of transducers and sources, my still young ears have never been let down by such a system

If you were here I'd think you'd agree that the Truth definately sounds more transparent. I did not say absoultely. I said in my system.

 

[gebeege1]

Noise and distortion.

If noise and distortion = transperancy, I'd agree with you.

 

[raif71]

The pre90 has a low input impedance while The Truth has a high input impedance base on below info :

FS: The Truth Pre Amp

Further information: I have owned this magnificent sounding passive preamplifier since new with no issues at all. Manufactured in the USA and includes two RCA inputs and one RCA output. I have included the blurb from the website that explains the technical aspects of the preamp much better than I...

www.stereonet.com

Topping Pre90 Review (preamplifier)

Great performance but expensive for what it is. The HPA-4 is $2999. This Topping comes pretty close, at $599 without the extender. That's not particularly bad. Someone with speakers that needs a world-class pre is probably willing to pay that. If you want a pre in a headphone set-up, perhaps the...

www.audiosciencereview.com

A preamp should have a high input impedance so that it could match the 1:8 or 1:10 ratio of the DAC that it connects to. If it doesn't match the ratio than the sound would be distorted hence could sound veiled. In this case of impedance matching, The Truth would be a better preamp compared to the Pre90

 

[NicS]

I agree that we are talking about preferences. Yes, I definatley prefer The Truth. Whether this is a function of distortion is moot as you cannot seperate out other vaiables. For example, I'm not convinced "synergy" is simply a balancing of nice noise and distortion. And that's not to start with "distortion" throughout the recording chain (and with electric instruments, their distortion).

Also, there's a bias here. You assume that The Truth must be a problem; have you done the comparision I've done? And, are you assuming that measurements = truth?

This a bit like losing a friend to Jesus.

What on earth is “The Truth”? As soon as I start hearing languages like this, my immediate reaction is to try and figure out where the big lie is.

The beauty of ASR as a concept and a community is that it bypasses the absurd voices that have for decades extolled the virtues of exotic interconnects (previously called audio cables), or speaker cable lifts, or exotic contact cleaners, or multi-thousand dollar power conditioners, or one of the myriad of faith-based audio woo-woo nonsense. Instead, it relies on measurements of equipment to help us make decisions about what to consider using in our audio systems. It’s helped me enormously.

I do find it amusing when the “golden ear” brigade, seemingly unaware of the concepts of confirmation bias, start with the abstract language to describe the indescribable and likely fictitious nuances of expensive equipment that makes outrageous claims to quality, yet empirically underperform against a modestly priced, Chinese manufactured piece of equipment. They talk as if we are apostates in their sacred space of knowledge.

If you prefer tube noise, bless your cotton socks. If you like a healthy dose of warm distortion poured over your Led Zeppelin, you go for it. Whatever floats your boat and makes you happy. Which begs the question:

What the hell are you doing here, among the rational?

 

[raif71]

 

[gebeege1]

This a bit like losing a friend to Jesus.

What on earth is “The Truth”? As soon as I start hearing languages like this, my immediate reaction is to try and figure out where the big lie is.

The beauty of ASR as a concept and a community is that it bypasses the absurd voices that have for decades extolled the virtues of exotic interconnects (previously called audio cables), or speaker cable lifts, or exotic contact cleaners, or multi-thousand dollar power conditioners, or one of the myriad of faith-based audio woo-woo nonsense. Instead, it relies on measurements of equipment to help us make decisions about what to consider using in our audio systems. It’s helped me enormously.

I do find it amusing when the “golden ear” brigade, seemingly unaware of the concepts of confirmation bias, start with the abstract language to describe the indescribable and likely fictitious nuances of expensive equipment that makes outrageous claims to quality, yet empirically underperform against a modestly priced, Chinese manufactured piece of equipment. They talk as if we are apostates in their sacred space of knowledge.

If you prefer tube noise, bless your cotton socks. If you like a healthy dose of warm distortion poured over your Led Zeppelin, you go for it. Whatever floats your boat and makes you happy. Which begs the question:

What the hell are you doing here, among the rational?

I'm not responsible for the name the maker of The Truth chose. As a rational person, I'd have thought you'd know this! You have irrationally conflated your version of absurd, golden ears, and amplification types with my telling of my experience of my SYSTEM. As @raif71 notes, a likely culprit might be an impedance mismatch. But you (and other dogmatic theologians of science), have a need to cast aspersions, that's irrational! ;-) Try not to confuse science with truth, especially if you are not taking a systems perspective. This is because we do not live in a causally linear universe. Relativity anyone? Wave particle duality? quantum mechanics? I could go on... Try not to be a bigot a la Richard Dawkins.

 

[NicS]

I'm not responsible for the name the maker of The Truth chose. As a rational person, I'd have thought you'd know this! You have irrationally conflated your version of absurd, golden ears, and amplification types with my telling of my experience of my SYSTEM. As @raif71 notes, a likely culprit might be an impedance mismatch. But you (and other dogmatic theologians of science), have a need to cast aspersions, that's irrational! ;-) Try not to confuse science with truth, especially if you are not taking a systems perspective. This is because we do not live in a causally linear universe. Relativity anyone? Wave particle duality? quantum mechanics? I could go on... Try not to be a bigot a la Richard Dawkins.

I’ll take the conflagration of my position with that of Dawkins as a badge of honor. I share his frustration of the willfully irrational.