• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Topping Pre90 Review (preamplifier)

Harmonie

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 30, 2020
Messages
1,927
Likes
2,084
Location
France
If you only have 1 device source, and volume reduction is the only function - no active gain needed, the Pre90 would be overkill for the application.

Besides the additional cost, there are the aspects of having another active signal amplifying device, you should be able to get by with a less expensive passive volume control device instead, and with good build components, there shouldn't be any effect on the audio quality.

Sorry, I don't currently use a passive volume control so I cannot give a personal use recommendation, perhaps someone else can give a recommendation for one they use?

I did a quick search on Amazon for "passive volume control", these are names I know and they look good enough to check out. And, there are more to look at one Amazon too. :)

Amazon.com: Schiit SYS Volume Control and 2-Input Switch: Home Audio & Theater

Amazon.com: Nobsound Mini Fully-Balanced/Single-Ended Passive Preamp; Hi-Fi Pre-Amplifier; XLR/RCA Volume Controller for Active Monitor Speakers (Black): Home Audio & Theater
Photo of back panel with XLR inputs and outputs, Douk Designed - I'm looking at getting a tube amp from Douk Audio Designs too.
View attachment 130383
And, here is the front panel, nicely sized for stable volume control use than their smaller RCA/RCA only models.
View attachment 130388
Amazon.com: Nobsound High Precision Passive Preamp Volume Controller VOL Control HiFi Preamplifier ALPS (RCA&HiFi Version, Black): Home Audio & Theater

A little more searching, I remembered this gem from a review I'd read (and seen on Youtube), perhaps overkill too - it switches 4 devices, but it got good reviews:

Amazon.com: Bellari PP532 Passive Preamplifier: Electronics

Then I searched on Youtube and was reminded of the Schitt Loki Equalizer that can also be switched to a passive bypass mode, and you might enjoy the equalizer functions, hopefully, these active devices do not degrade the audio signal audibly:

Schiit Audio: LOKI MINI+ HIGH-QUALITY 4-BAND TONE CONTROL $149 ROLLING BACKORDER. SHIPS 4-6 WEEKS.
"The Silent and Transparent Companion
Loki Mini+ transforms your system without getting in the way, or making itself known. Forget noisy, bad-sounding equalizers you may have used in the past. Loki Mini+ uses a single, discrete, current-feedback gain stage, coupled to passive LC filters for 3 bands, plus a gyrator for the bass. It also uses sealed Alps potentiometers with rational adjustment ranges to allow for fine control. Coupled with a 100% passive bypass setting, Loki Mini+ offers the transparency and flexibility you need." - Not sure if the Passive Bypass still allows volume control? More info on the Schitt site.

And, then I recalled Bellari also has an Equalizer - along with other Bellari similar-sized devices, like a Phono Amplifier - check out the comments for more info / photos. This is powered like the Schitt Loki and this Bellari has an "Active" button - again not sure if the Loki / Bellari has passive volume control when in passive mode...

Amazon.com: Bellari Rolls EQ570 Audio Equalizer: Home Audio & Theater

Question: Loki vs eq570. how does each sound? which do you prefer?
Answer: "They sound similar and function alike. I prefer the Bellari since it has a slightly better build and its on/off switch is accessible on the front side (unlike the Loki)."
Answer: "Real difference is Loki bass boost centered around 20hz, Bellari at 60hz. Otherwise almost the same, Bellari power buttons on the front and of course gorgeous red color. No discernible quality differences in build. Bellari may be a bit heavier w/slightly thicker build material, it’s been a while since I handled Shiit and my memory may be off."

Question: How is this compared to Schiit Loki? from a performance standpoint
Answer: "For me, the low control at 60hz is better than the Loki’s at 20 hz. (Room resonance)"
Answer: "I have heard others say the two are basically the same, have no personal experience with the Schiit."

Impedance variation is the issue (for some at least) and for once PS audio above posted by @Peternz sounds reasonable.
 

Deki

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2020
Messages
9
Likes
14
Well, finally gave up on the Pre90, I'll send it back. I tried to love it, went back and forth with so many different recordings using my tube phono pre, and dac, but I couldn't get a sound I can live with. It has beautiful clarity and sheen, top end extension, but just missing some warmth in the low end. On one track recently (All of me, Adam Mackowicz), there was so much missing that it was hard to follow the bass line which was clearly audible on my other preamp. My brain liked a lot of what I was hearing, but ultimately I didn't enjoy hearing music played through the Pre90 as much as I did with my other preamp. Might suit some systems, but didn't do it for me.
In case anyone needs to know, I made up an RCA to XLR interconnect (hot pin 2, sheild on pins 1 and 3) to use the XLR input as single ended, and it worked great-it can be totally used as a 2-single ended input preamp with balanced out, the gain settings stock even made the 2 different inputs come out at approx the same volume.
 
Last edited:

hmscott

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
604
Likes
493
Happy to oblige. My system changes all the time, sometimes many times a day, so I will have to pass on giving you the configurations specifics. The most notable passive attenuators I have had in my system were a Goldpoint stepped attenuator in a DIY pre, a Rotel RHC-10 preamp and a LDR, light dependent resistor pre amplifier. The Goldpoint was pretty good. The Rotel looks gorgeous but the sound is laid back and a bit lazy. The LDR preamp sounded clear with a lovely reverb but also slow. None of them provided a sound I really enjoyed. The Rotel and especially the Goldpoint are much higher quality than a generic ALPS pot. No idea how the LDR pre compares to an ALPS pot.

I would not touch most of the devices from Amazon that you posted with a 10 foot pole (Schiit should be ok...). I say this based on decades of experience with audio equipment.

View attachment 130424View attachment 130425
Which one "kill[ed] the energy of music"? You don't seem to have really bad things to say about the passive pre-amps you gave as examples.

And, if you don't have first-hand experience with the units I posted, you don't know anything about them do you? You are guessing based on nothing except they are inexpensive?

And, the actual owners for the most part rated the devices highly and gave good listening reports.

Many people use inexpensive simple variable attenuators; I've used them many years ago myself and they worked great for my use - and I am very critical of audio.

Perhaps someone can give us a useful first-hand report about the current inexpensive variable attenuators?
More on passives vs actives. Yes, he knows what he is talking about:
I never said a passive preamp was better than an active preamp, I've been through that testing myself decades ago and decided on an active preamp for my own listening enjoyment.

But, if you don't want to spend a bunch of money on a good active preamp, there are times an inexpensive passive volume attenuator is fine to get you through until you save up enough for an active preamp.

And, don't forget to follow Rotel's recommendations for new audio equipment, as mentioned in the Rotel RCH-10 Owners Manual:
Rotel RHC-10-OM.JPG


Break-in time for any new audio component is important - we need to give time for our ears to become adjusted to the new sound elements introduced with new equipment inserted into the audio signal path.
Impedance variation is the issue (for some at least) and for once PS audio above posted by @Peternz sounds reasonable.
If I needed a passive variable attenuator I'd pick two or three to order and audition in my system. I've found variations of compatibility for new products added into my systems at higher price points, and the same goes for less expensive products.

If you read the owner comments for the products I linked, most all of them found listening enjoyment with those variable attenuation devices in their systems. And, there are a lot more choices out there that I didn't post. :)
The simple way to use DAC digital attenuator in it's upper range is to use simple attenuator on RCA / XLR.
Other way is to make an interconnect with voltage divider (2 resistors) set to some fixed attenuation.
These passives can potentially create more problems than they solve. I'd use one only if my DAC had fixed output that was too "hot" for my integrated amp.
If you reduce the volume in the digital domain you are reducing the bits - but when you have a 16bit/44.1khz signal, and you have a DAC with 32bit/768khz of headroom - I've found I can reduce the volume with the variable volume "Pre" mode of the Topping D90 MQA - adding attenuation of -3dB to -15dB with no audible reduction in the quality of the sound. Even going down as far as -30dB it still sounds great.

I've not heard any added noise in the output either.

And, this is listening through the Topping A90 / Xduoo TA-20 headphone amplifiers with sensitive IEM's and the Hifiman Ananda - all far more sensitive to noise and audio degradation than my other headphones / IEMs.

If you have a DAC that can go into a variable volume output mode, give that a try first - if you don't hear any loss of quality or increase of noise, that is probably a better way to go about volume reduction than adding any passive/active volume control component to the audio path. :)
Well, finally gave up on the Pre90, I'll send it back. I tried to love it, went back and forth with so many different recordings using my tube phono pre, and dac, but I couldn't get a sound I can live with. It has beautiful clarity and sheen, top end extension, but just missing some warmth in the low end. On one track recently (All of me, Adam Mackowicz), there was so much missing that it was hard to follow the bass line which was clearly audible on my other preamp. My brain liked a lot of what I was hearing, but ultimately I didn't enjoy hearing music played through the Pre90 as much as I did with my other preamp. Might suit some systems, but didn't do it for me.
In case anyone needs to know, I made up an RCA to XLR interconnect (hot pin 2, sheild on pins 1 and 3) to use the XLR input as single ended, and it worked great-it can be totally used as a 2-single ended input preamp with balanced out, the gain settings stock even made the 2 different inputs come out at approx the same volume.
And, that says it all. Measurements are only a guide, actually listening to a component in your system and judging if the end result is a positive or negative for your listening enjoyment.

I found the same with the Topping A90 vs Xduoo TA-20, the A90 measures better, but the TA-20 with any tubes - even with the stock Shuguang tubes, the TA-20 sounds better than the A90.

I hope you find what you are looking for as a replacement for the Pre90, and please come back and let us know what you found as a better sounding replacement for the Pre90. :)
 
Last edited:

Peternz

Active Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2021
Messages
139
Likes
258
Which one "kill[ed] the energy of music"? You don't seem to have really bad things to say about the passive pre-amps you gave as examples.

And, if you don't have first-hand experience with the units I posted, you don't know anything about them do you? You are guessing based on nothing except they are inexpensive?

They all killed the energy, however the Goldpoint did by far the least damage and was semi acceptable.

Yes, I am guessing but my guess is educated, based on experience, reviews and photos that reveal hideous workmanship.

B1.JPG
 

Veri

Master Contributor
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
9,596
Likes
12,036
And, that says it all. Measurements are only a guide, actually listening to a component in your system and judging if the end result is a positive or negative for your listening enjoyment.

I found the same with the Topping A90 vs Xduoo TA-20, the A90 measures better, but the TA-20 with any tubes - even with the stock Shuguang tubes, the TA-20 sounds better than the A90.

I hope you find what you are looking for as a replacement for the Pre90, and please come back and let us know what you found as a better sounding replacement for the Pre90. :)

No offence but the "listening > measurements" things goes a little against ASR no? Might as well go full objective :p

So far I've read many anecdotal 'Pre90 sounds superb, better than much more expensive pre-amps' and the odd 'Pre90 doesn't work in my set-up'. Could be impedance matching issues. Or in case of weird channel tracking, possibly a defective unit? I'm sure it won't work in every set-up imaginable but so far I've seen mostly very positive feedback on the Pre90's sound and usability.
 

hmscott

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
604
Likes
493
They all killed the energy, however the Goldpoint did by far the least damage and was semi acceptable.

Yes, I am guessing but my guess is educated, based on experience, reviews and photos that reveal hideous workmanship.
The photo you posted is from a review from a date during the middle of the pandemic, one post next to it said the knobs were too small, many of the others said the knobs size and placement were good for their use.
complaint:]https://www.amazon.com/gp/profile/a...4BDUBWSTJSAIA/ref=cm_cr_getr_d_gw_btm?ie=UTF8
5.0 out of 5 stars This is the equalizer you are looking for, dont spend more money.
Reviewed in the United States on April 18, 2020
"I have owned many systems and many equalizers. I have spent more than this unit on an equalizer, and I have spent less. Obviously spending less leads to a decline in quality. However, I have not found that spending more increases the quality at all. I have returned every more expensive equalizer I have bought.

This unit has perfect tonal control, which is great because my DAC produces music that is way too balanced for its own good. The sound coming out of my headphone amplifier, without this unit, has, basically, zero bass. This unit provides that bass, it also provides clearer separation than my DAC does between highs, mids and lows, when tuned right. Your DAC is your processing engine, this is what you use to tune the sound to the way you like, and for that it is perfect. This is a phenomenal piece of equipment no matter how you cut it. Sure you can spend more, and get the same quality, but why?"

5.0 out of 5 stars Equalization is a must
Reviewed in the United States on May 12, 2020
Got this as a gift. Works excellent. I am using the 60 HZ setting (bass) and some treble 7500 HZ. The rest is at center. It is connected in series at eye level (shelf) after an "audioengine D1" DAC from an HP computer, then the Bellari EQ570 EQ, Nobsound NS-10P tube preamp with volume at a 1/4 setting and to a Nobsound NS-O8E tube amp at less than 1/2 volume setting. The EQ is used for headphone application only. I don't have fat fingers; no complaints with the knob distances. Using Audio Technica-M50 headphones for the test. Nice job on the back connections. RCA in and out or 3.5 mm choices. Nice design and red color fits uniquely. I get some mid bass, detailed mids and highs with the Nobsound devices. The Bellari EQ enhances all audio frequencies even more utilizing "Groove or WinAmp" media player on the computer and definitely needed on Windows Media Player. I wanted to buy this device. I will definitely buy this EQ for someone else in the family if desired."

Great!
Reviewed in the United States on July 16, 2020
"Another fantastic piece of gear from Bellari. I’ve used the phono preamp and sonic exciter in the past and was impressed- this is the same. Nice quality, good sound, and easy to use. I’m using this in between a Bottlehead Foreplay preamp and an S-5 electronics power amp, and it gives me a little control over the signal without messing with the signal too much."
Often product comments have date ranges with a number of complaint posts during a problem period for a product, and often the damage is due to an Amazon warehouse or delivery shipping problem - products are damaged in the Amazon warehouse before/during shipment or during shipping.

If you check the Belari Rolls EQ570 Audio Equalizer comments sorted by "most recent", you'll find nothing but 5/4 Star reviews for pages before and after that comment photo you posted:
https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/B07PPQ3XWM

Yup, inexpensive products are going to have bad days for manufacturing just like any other product. For any product, you'll find problems and complaints on Amazon.

For most products I have ordered on Amazon and enjoyed, there are negative comments or comments with images of damaged products, but as long as there is a much higher percentage of 5 and 4-star postings, and the problem times are long gone, I'll still give an Amazon listed product a chance.

Again, for the products I listed I have no experience with them, I only posted them to assist the previous ASR member, not to specifically recommend a product but to suggest there are inexpensive passive products out there to solve the passive volume attenuation need he had.

We can stop now, unless you want to purchase a few for @amirm to measure for ASR? :)
 
Last edited:

PaulD

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
453
Likes
1,341
Location
Other
They all killed the energy, however the Goldpoint did by far the least damage and was semi acceptable.

Yes, I am guessing but my guess is educated, based on experience, reviews and photos that reveal hideous workmanship.
Uh huh... Without a level matched blind test the listening "test" is useless and biased, as they all are, seems the listening is based on "photos"... "Killed the energy" - again, what units is this measured in? Or do you mean distortion or some other measurable factor? Without measurements or data there is nothing anyone can discuss.

Remember:
- We can measure everything that can be heard
- We can measure to greater resolution than human hearing
- Everything that can be heard can be measured
 

hmscott

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
604
Likes
493
No offence but the "listening > measurements" things goes a little against ASR no? Might as well go full objective :p

So far I've read many anecdotal 'Pre90 sounds superb, better than much more expensive pre-amps' and the odd 'Pre90 doesn't work in my set-up'. Could be impedance matching issues. Or in case of weird channel tracking, possibly a defective unit? I'm sure it won't work in every set-up imaginable but so far I've seen mostly very positive feedback on the Pre90's sound and usability.
Uh huh... Without a level matched blind test the listening "test" is useless and biased, as they all are, seems the listening is based on "photos"... "Killed the energy" - again, what units is this measured in? Or do you mean distortion or some other measurable factor? Without measurements or data there is nothing anyone can discuss.

Remember:
- We can measure everything that can be heard
- We can measure to greater resolution than human hearing
- Everything that can be heard can be measured
You are both missing a big element that isn't measured in any ASR product test, what we as individuals hear and enjoy listening to.

There are certainly measurement "standards" against which product acceptance is measured, but after the purchase, "you can't please all the people all of the time".

That is the variable that every array of product measurements can't be certain of, will an individual enjoy the end result - listening to music played through the product.

Will "Ted" or "Moon Unit", or 100% of the population of buyers enjoy the music out of a top measuring product, will 100% of the buying public never return a product that measures well?

That is why companies use measurements of products they are developing - to see if it measures well against the "generic" population or against the accepted "standard"...and they will make design changes/decisions based on measurements during development. They will even publish measurements as a marketing tool to convince people to purchase their product. Or, not publish them if they aren't convincing.

I don't think we need to force people to "like" something - or say they like something - that they don't actually enjoy using, simply because they don't like what they are "hearing".

We can't tell them they are "wrong", that the measurements "prove" they are wrong, that they can't take back that product because it "measures" well.

We can't argue with their perception or force them to like something they don't like when they simply don't like it.

We can use the measurements to suggest they need to adjust their system components to match the capabilities of the top measuring product, and that is why they aren't enjoying the sound they are hearing. But we can't tell them to keep something they don't enjoy simply because it measures well.

Everyone's end goal when buying audio equipment is to listen to music, movies, sound that pleases them. We can't ask them to look at the numbers, graphs, and other visual methods of viewing audio measurements while listening to convince them they like the sound they are hearing, it is the sound they hear is that convinces them to keep their purchase.

I'm sure @amirm understands that for every Hifi listener, the joy of aquiring new audio equipment, is in the listening. :)
 
Last edited:

Veri

Master Contributor
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
9,596
Likes
12,036
That is why companies use measurements of products they are developing - to see if it measures well against the "generic" population or against the accepted "standard"...and they will make design changes/decisions based on measurements during development. They will even publish measurements as a marketing tool to convince people to purchase their product. Or, not publish them if they aren't convincing.

I don't think we need to force people to "like" something they don't actually enjoy using, simply because they don't like what they are "hearing".
Oh but that was never my point there though. I don't think one should be forced to like something he doesn't like. On the other hand, especially the bit where you mention "not publish measurements if they aren't convincing", if the manufacturer knows they're not good enough to show that would be a major red flag to me. "Still sounds good" to me is not enough of an argument. I honestly think a lot of what enthusiasts think is "euphonic distortion" is really nothing all that great. Then again I've always quickly sold tube oriented gear, I've never seen the appeal or heard the magic ;)

Everyone has their tastes, sure, 100% agree. But if part of your conviction stems more from beliefs in some hard to define qualities, because that's basically the differentiator here, I would not personally rely on that second hand opinion/experience. But if you own something and you like it and are happy, 100% not knocking it haha :p
 

hmscott

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
604
Likes
493
Oh but that was never my point there though. I don't think one should be forced to like something he doesn't like. On the other hand, especially the bit where you mention "not publish measurements if they aren't convincing", if the manufacturer knows they're not good enough to show that would be a major red flag to me.
Yup, that that is part of how we measure the value of a product before purchase. Those of us that know when a product doesn't have manufacturer published measurements, it signals that the manufacturer may know something they don't want us to know - and that is why ASR is so valuable - we need somewhere else to go to get the information the manufacturer isn't confident enough to publish themselves.

Over time most manufacturers only publish a small number of results of measurement sessions, not the actual "whole picture'. Even if they are not hiding something, there isn't much information to help us make product comparisons to inform our buying decisions.

ASR and all of the other independent measurement publishers are adding pressure on the manufacturers to work harder in development - and to go back and fix problems in continuing products by doing complete measurements of their products to find problems.

We need ASR and others to publish their independent complete and thorough measurements along with how they do the measurements. That is why I am happy @amirm is now publishing video coverage of his testing. :)
 

PaulD

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
453
Likes
1,341
Location
Other
Oh but that was never my point there though. I don't think one should be forced to like something he doesn't like. On the other hand, especially the bit where you mention "not publish measurements if they aren't convincing", if the manufacturer knows they're not good enough to show that would be a major red flag to me. "Still sounds good" to me is not enough of an argument. I honestly think a lot of what enthusiasts think is "euphonic distortion" is really nothing all that great. Then again I've always quickly sold tube oriented gear, I've never seen the appeal or heard the magic ;)

Everyone has their tastes, sure, 100% agree. But if part of your conviction stems more from beliefs in some hard to define qualities, because that's basically the differentiator here, I would not personally rely on that second hand opinion/experience. But if you own something and you like it and are happy, 100% not knocking it haha :p
Exactly Veri!

The Topping cannot "kill the energy"(of the music) - it is simply impossible. The unit provides exceptionally clean gain (and input switching), nothing more and nothing less. If I needed a preamp I am sure I would be happy with it.

I have seen SO much of this uncontrolled listening lead people to silly thinking, even professionals, even to the point where people believing that the colour of the LED on the front panel changes the sound :facepalm: (or pictures of the components etc etc). The only listening that is worth putting on this site is controlled, level matched, blind listening tests. That turns "listening" into science that makes it transposable to other people's experiences. Uncontrolled tests are for individual consumption only.
 

Deki

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2020
Messages
9
Likes
14
Uh huh... Without a level matched blind test the listening "test" is useless and biased, as they all are, seems the listening is based on "photos"... "Killed the energy" - again, what units is this measured in? Or do you mean distortion or some other measurable factor? Without measurements or data there is nothing anyone can discuss.

Remember:
- We can measure everything that can be heard
- We can measure to greater resolution than human hearing
- Everything that can be heard can be measured
I really do not agree with these statements. Yes, measurements of some parameters are more resolved than we can hear, but for sure we have not figured out how to measure everything we hear. So far, no one can predict how a component will sound based on the current group of measurements. We can get a good sense of how it will perform with respect to some parameters, but the act of listening to complex waveforms with a component inserted into a system reveals things that we haven't been able to put a number on yet.
 

PaulD

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
453
Likes
1,341
Location
Other
I really do not agree with these statements. Yes, measurements of some parameters are more resolved than we can hear, but for sure we have not figured out how to measure everything we hear. So far, no one can predict how a component will sound based on the current group of measurements. We can get a good sense of how it will perform with respect to some parameters, but the act of listening to complex waveforms with a component inserted into a system reveals things that we haven't been able to put a number on yet.
You can disagree as much as you like, but you would be wrong.

There is plenty of evidence to support what I wrote, and I have linked to it several times before, so I will not do it now. You are new here, do some research. Look up SIY's articles, for example "Testing, one two three" on Linear Audio, or Mike Uwin's article "Analog Hearts, Digital Minds". You will find that what I wrote is correct.
 

Deki

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2020
Messages
9
Likes
14
So there is a number that can describe soundstage? It should have been possible, given the measurements, to know if I would have liked the sound of the Topping Pre90 when inserted into my system? I really don't think that we are there, but I'll do my research on the articles you mentioned. Just like predicting the future, given what we know about the motion of particles, might be theoretically possible, but in reality there is no way of knowing what lottery numbers will come up even if we know everything about the weight, composition and structure and environment of the little numbered balls. Without plugging a preamp into a system and listening to it, it's impossible to know exactly how it will sound. And the sound is really the only thing that anyone should be interested in, isn't that the ultimate goal here? It's not useful, repeatable and scientific to speak about how something sounds, it gets messy; but correlating measurements to actual reported sound quality should be the goal of any science-based investigation. Assuming you know everything that there is to know is a little anti-science, I think. I'll dig into the articles and previous discussions to inform myself some more.
 

Veri

Master Contributor
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
9,596
Likes
12,036
So there is a number that can describe soundstage?
I think people claiming significant soundstage changes are either having major differences in output levels, or crosstalk. So comparing apples with apples will never yield such crazy sound stage changes, no way. There's no reason for that in any case. No numbers, as you say.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,700
I think people claiming significant soundstage changes are either having major differences in output levels, or crosstalk. So comparing apples with apples will never yield such crazy sound stage changes, no way. There's no reason for that in any case. No numbers, as you say.
This thread is littered with such talk.
Other than better gain staging I fail to see how a pre amp can create many of the improvements noted over and above a transparent dac with vol control into amp.
 

Deki

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2020
Messages
9
Likes
14
This thread is littered with such talk.
Other than better gain staging I fail to see how a pre amp can create many of the improvements noted over and above a transparent dac with vol control into amp.
Yes, we fail to see how it is possible, which is why we need more science! Many people hear things we 'fail to see'. Nice to think it's all in our heads, but I really think that there are other things happening that we haven't figured out how to quantify. Or I could be wrong, but history shows us that the progress of science brings new discoveries where we thought we knew it all.
 

Peternz

Active Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2021
Messages
139
Likes
258
Uh huh... Without a level matched blind test the listening "test" is useless and biased, as they all are, seems the listening is based on "photos"... "Killed the energy" - again, what units is this measured in? Or do you mean distortion or some other measurable factor? Without measurements or data there is nothing anyone can discuss.

Remember:
- We can measure everything that can be heard
- We can measure to greater resolution than human hearing
- Everything that can be heard can be measured

This is just my experience in my home with my own system. If you don't like it just ignore it. Telling people what they can and can not discuss is a bit immature. Did it ever occur to you that some people may find a discussion of audio perceptions useful? You may be fossilized in your own views but don't try to impose that on others.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,700
Yes, we fail to see how it is possible, which is why we need more science! Many people hear things we 'fail to see'. Nice to think it's all in our heads, but I really think that there are other things happening that we haven't figured out how to quantify. Or I could be wrong, but history shows us that the progress of science brings new discoveries where we thought we knew it all.
Let's not go down that road. It's well trodden.
 
Top Bottom