[William Noble]

I hope I haven't stirred anything up!
Genuine question.
Room: 11'x13'x8' high (quite small for the size of speakers)
Speakers: Focal Chorus 714v 130Wmax/90W nom 91dB/W
Pre-amp: (when I purchase it) Benchmark DAC1
Classical music (including orchestral) at moderate levels.
Budget £1000 if I need to but less if I can get a well made power amp
with sufficient power.

Phileas

my advice is below.

1. maximize quality of preamp - buy the best that you can afford - by best I
mean that which sounds the best to you.
then maximize the quality of your signal source within budget - for example
if you will be using CDs, the D/A will dominate the sound - that is why I
spent way too much $$ (from a logical point of view) for a specific external
D/A.
2. once you have that stuff, and your speakers, just try out amps within
your budget.

No one seems to believe me that in my experience, sound quality improves
with power. I was actually surprised to find this out when I tried it the
first time - I expected the Leak amp (at 15 watts, I think, mono) to sound
the best, but it sounded the worst. I'm not going to debate testing
methodologies, I am just reporting my experience. I'm pretty unbiased in
these things. With a "modest" thousand pound budget, I would give the power
amp short shrift because the other parts make a larger audible difference. I
would also encourage you to get whatever you settle on used and to get it
several years old, from an original owner if you can - you will save a lot
of $$ that way.

[Sonnova]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 05:33:43 -0700, William Noble wrote
(in article ):

I hope I haven't stirred anything up!
Genuine question.
Room: 11'x13'x8' high (quite small for the size of speakers)
Speakers: Focal Chorus 714v 130Wmax/90W nom 91dB/W
Pre-amp: (when I purchase it) Benchmark DAC1
Classical music (including orchestral) at moderate levels.
Budget £1000 if I need to but less if I can get a well made power amp
with sufficient power.

Phileas

my advice is below.

1. maximize quality of preamp - buy the best that you can afford - by best I
mean that which sounds the best to you.
then maximize the quality of your signal source within budget - for example
if you will be using CDs, the D/A will dominate the sound - that is why I
spent way too much $$ (from a logical point of view) for a specific external
D/A.
2. once you have that stuff, and your speakers, just try out amps within
your budget.

No one seems to believe me that in my experience, sound quality improves
with power. I was actually surprised to find this out when I tried it the
first time - I expected the Leak amp (at 15 watts, I think, mono) to sound
the best, but it sounded the worst. I'm not going to debate testing
methodologies, I am just reporting my experience. I'm pretty unbiased in
these things. With a "modest" thousand pound budget, I would give the power
amp short shrift because the other parts make a larger audible difference. I
would also encourage you to get whatever you settle on used and to get it
several years old, from an original owner if you can - you will save a lot
of $$ that way.


Unfortunately, one has to talk about testing methodologies or your (or anyone
else's) results aren't worth squat. See, If you have fairly inefficient
speakers (not an unwarranted assumption these days) and you connect a 15-Watt
amp up to them and try to play the speakers at normal listening levels, that
Leak amp is going to be in clipping most of the time, and OF COURSE it's also
going to sound bad. You are going to find this to be true until you get to an
amp with a power rating large enough to meet the speakers' power
requirements.

Assuming that the Leak is working properly, if you, OTOH, connect it to a
speaker system designed to be used with low-power amps such as those designed
with single-ended, class-A tube amps in mind or Klipschorns, you will likely
find that the Leak sounds very good and that a larger amp really brings
nothing to THAT particular party.

That's why its important to know HOW you used the these amps.

[jwvm]

On Oct 14, 8:33*am, "William Noble" wrote:

snip

my advice is below.

1. maximize quality of preamp - buy the best that you can afford - by best I
mean that which sounds the best to you.
then maximize the quality of your signal source within budget - for example
if you will be using CDs, the D/A will dominate the sound - that is why I
spent way too much $$ (from a logical point of view) for a specific external
D/A.

Many modern low-cost D/A converters have extremely good performance
and it is quite easy to design excellent preamplifiers. The money
saved here (perhaps just by purchasing a good-quality receiver) would
be better spent on speakers.

2. once you have that stuff, and your speakers, just try out amps within
your budget.

*No one seems to believe me that in my experience, sound quality improves
with power. *I was actually surprised to find this out when I tried it the
first time - I expected the Leak amp (at 15 watts, I think, mono) to sound
the best, but it sounded the worst. *I'm not going to debate testing
methodologies, I am just reporting my experience. *I'm pretty unbiased in
these things. *

Biases are very difficult to avoid in sighted tests without very
careful level matching. Humans are simply very poor at this kind of
evaluation in uncontrolled tests.

With a "modest" thousand pound budget, I would give the power
amp short shrift because the other parts make a larger audible difference. I
would also encourage you to get whatever you settle on used and to get it
several years old, from an original owner if you can - you will save a lot
of $$ that way.

Good amplifiers need not be all that expensive. Spend the money on
speakers!

[Peter Wieck]

On Oct 15, 12:08*am, jwvm wrote:

Good amplifiers need not be all that expensive. Spend the money on
speakers!

AMEN TO THAT.

With all due respect to outbroard D/A converters, about any off-the-
shelf player is capable of playing anything (compatible) fed into it.
Really. It comes down to a couple of chips, some proprietary software
and the rest is smoke and mirrors.

Pre-amps fall more-or-less into the same category. You are purchasing
signal processing and switching capacity. As few individuals support
vinyl and even fewer tape-heads or mircrophones directly the major
functions of a pre-amp back-in-the-day may be handled by a simple
attenuator and selector-switch directly in the power-amp.

Power-amps have been discussed ad-nauseum. Generally, "moreisbetter"
and "tubesareaviablechoiceif thelimitationsareunderstood" with
irrational outlyers at each end.

Comes to the speakers. Did I mention the speakers? Oh, RIGHT - the
speakers!

At the present moment, I have no less than eight (8) sets of speakers
from five (5) manufacturers - all US or Euro origin. And I am still
trying as variations cross my path. I have had one set in operation
for 23 years, another for 11, the rest come and go with regularity.
So, I can be _satisfied_ with speakers but the hunt for the 'perfect
pair' goes on. And, for the record, what I have listened to and heard
in sales venues *NEVER* sounds the same at home. Yes, I can discern
broad aspects but the in-situ, at home, my-electronics experience
requires some time to set in and to be well understood.

Speakers, speakers, speakers. Amps I got from 15wpc tube flea-flickers
to 275wpc beasts. It is surprising how little difference it makes
between them under normal conditions. It is not at all surprising at
the margins as to which does the best.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

[Sonnova]

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 06:15:43 -0700, Peter Wieck wrote
(in article ):

On Oct 15, 12:08*am, jwvm wrote:

Good amplifiers need not be all that expensive. Spend the money on
speakers!

AMEN TO THAT.

With all due respect to outbroard D/A converters, about any off-the-
shelf player is capable of playing anything (compatible) fed into it.
Really. It comes down to a couple of chips, some proprietary software
and the rest is smoke and mirrors.

Pre-amps fall more-or-less into the same category. You are purchasing
signal processing and switching capacity. As few individuals support
vinyl and even fewer tape-heads or mircrophones directly the major
functions of a pre-amp back-in-the-day may be handled by a simple
attenuator and selector-switch directly in the power-amp.

The problem with a simple attenuator & switch solution is the source
impedance changes with volume setting. A buffer stage (at least) is required
to avoid this unless you spend the dough for a balanced attenuator.

[Peter Wieck]

On Oct 15, 6:51*pm, Sonnova wrote:

unless you spend the dough for a balanced attenuator.

Certainly!

This is represented as a "high end" newsgroup. These sorts of niceties
are par for the course. The cost of balanced attenuator is only
significant as measured against the typical carbon audio-taper pot. As
against a decent stand-alone pre-amp, it is insignificant. The point
being that with line-level output devices there is absolutely no
reason whatsoever for a pre-amp unless additional signal processing is
a requirement.

For the record, it makes not one bit of difference whether the source
impedance changes (or not) or whether the attenuator is in the source
or the amp. If, for instance, one simple desires to run a CD/SACD into
an amp, than any attenuator that does not alter the signal except for
voltage is adequate. Similarly a Tuner, tape deck and so forth - and
all such devices I own do have internal level controls. Add a selector
switch, and one has all that is required. Add any decent equalizer
(with an in/out switch) and there is no need for _any_ sort of pre-
amp.

Pre-amps as a class are dinosaurs for those who keep vinyl, must use
filters, bass or treble controls, make analog tapes and such. Spend
the money on the speakers - the bang-for-buck ratio is monumentally
higher.

Yes, I use a pre-amp - actually a tuner/pre-amp for my front-line
stereo. But that is because I choose to, use vinyl on occasion and
because I can, not because I must.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

[Arny Krueger]

"Peter Wieck" wrote in message

On Oct 15, 6:51 pm, Sonnova

For the record, it makes not one bit of difference
whether the source impedance changes (or not) or whether
the attenuator is in the source or the amp.

Certainly true for the types and lengths of cables that one sees in a
typical home system.

If, for instance, one simple desires to run a CD/SACD into an
amp, than any attenuator that does not alter the signal
except for voltage is adequate. Similarly a Tuner, tape
deck and so forth - and all such devices I own do have
internal level controls. Add a selector switch, and one
has all that is required. Add any decent equalizer (with
an in/out switch) and there is no need for _any_ sort of
pre- amp.

This statement clearly and properly addresses technical needs, but does not
necessarily address perceived needs and convenience. High end audio as we
know it today is often about perceived needs and convenience.

In my recollection, the most elaborate preamp I ever had was built into a
Heath AR-15 stereo receiver. It had plenty of inputs and outputs and
separate gain controls for both channels of every input. It turned out to
have so many adjustments that it was difficult to manage.

Pre-amps as a class are dinosaurs for those who keep vinyl,

Technically speaking, a phono preamp works best when it is as close to the
cartridge as possible. Tht puts it in the turntable chassis, not a central
system control center.

must use filters, bass or treble controls,

Preamp filters and classic tone controls pale in comparison to a modern
equalizer in terms of convenience and power.

make analog tapes and such.

Adding recorders and players is a switching and line driving issue,
generally well-satisfied by passive components. All of the recorders I've
worked with did not need extra gain to obtain full recording levels. They
had plenty of reserve gain inside their own boxes.

Spend the money on the speakers - the bang-for-buck ratio is monumentally
higher.

Agreed, and tune the room.

Yes, I use a pre-amp - actually a tuner/pre-amp for my
front-line stereo.

The system I listen to at home for enjoyment is centerpieced by a stereo
receiver. I rarely if ever use any control on it except its speaker
selection facility, to mute the speakers for headphone listening at night.
All the rest, the function selector switch, the volume control, the AM/FM
tuner, the recorder inputs and outputs, are *never* used. The system volume
control that is used routinely is in a TV set. Media selection is via the TV
set and the two DVRs.

The only reason why the receiver is not a power amplifier is that the
receiver is the simplest and most economical way to obtain a power amplifier
with remote-control speaker selection and a built-in headphone jack. Note
that this is not a system that I use for most critical listening.

But that is because I choose to, use
vinyl on occasion and because I can, not because I must.

[Peter Wieck]

On Oct 16, 9:11*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Peter Wieck" wrote in message



On Oct 15, 6:51 pm, Sonnova
For the record, it makes not one bit of difference
whether the source impedance changes (or not) or whether
the attenuator is in the source or the amp.

Certainly true for the types *and lengths of cables that one sees in a
typical home system.

If, for instance, one simple desires to run a CD/SACD into an
amp, than any attenuator that does not alter the signal
except for voltage is adequate. Similarly a Tuner, tape
deck and so forth - and all such devices I own do have
internal level controls. Add a selector switch, and one
has all that is required. Add any decent equalizer (with
an in/out switch) and there is no need for _any_ sort of
pre- amp.

This statement clearly and properly addresses technical needs, but does not
necessarily address perceived needs and convenience. *High end audio as we
know it today is often about perceived needs and convenience.

Uh, yeah! But this was offered in the context of the statement that
spending money on a high-quality pre-amp is a worthwhile endeavor.
Possibly so, but not for any actual gain in system quality or
performance *UNLESS* additional signal processing is *REQUIRED*.

There is no particular need for additional 'convenience' if
attenuation and selection are already covered.

In my recollection, the most elaborate preamp I ever had was built into a
Heath AR-15 stereo receiver. It had plenty of inputs and outputs and
separate gain controls for both channels of every input. It turned out to
have so many adjustments that it was difficult to manage.

Mpffff. My front-line tuner/pre-amp (Revox A720) has more controls
than a Boeing 767. However, once set up and the inputs (and outputs)
balanced (rear-accessible pots), the front controls are pretty
intuitive. At least I have the option of having the levels from all
my components at the same level when I switch between them. Further,
as there are sufficiently many inputs, once adjusted it is quite
useful for comparing between similar components.

Pre-amps as a class are dinosaurs for those who keep vinyl,

Technically speaking, a phono preamp works best when it is as close to the
cartridge as possible. Tht puts it in the turntable chassis, not a central
system control center.

Uh, yeah. So what? Very few do even these days, and those that do are
of dubious quality. So, a decent pre-amp/receiver/integrated amp will
have the ability to select from various capacitances - or will allow
specific matching caps to be installed and describe how to do it. Even
Dynaco did this with their PAT-5 series - not quite high-end.

must use filters, bass or treble controls,

Preamp filters and classic tone controls pale in comparison to a modern
equalizer in terms of convenience and power.

Uh, yeah. An equalizer is a nice tool if necessary. However, and under
most conditions, filters and tone controls - especially if adjustable
by individual channel - are sufficient. And if not sufficient then we
are back to no-pre-amp-necessary-get-an-equalizer.

make *analog tapes and such.

Adding recorders and players is a switching and line driving issue,
generally well-satisfied by passive components. All of the recorders I've
worked with did not need extra gain to obtain full recording levels. They
had plenty of reserve gain inside their own boxes.

Of course they do. However, the pre-amp provides the patch-bay that
most power amps do not - and the means to match the output level to
the source level that most power-amps do not. You did mention
convenience (and perception). This is acutely necessary with three-
head machines with specific reference to cassette machines which
seldom have separate output level controls to match incoming signal
levels to recorded signal levels when switching from "tape" to
"monitor".

*Spend the money on the speakers - the bang-for-buck ratio is monumentally
higher.

Agreed, and tune the room.

That is a moving target - as unless one lives alone accommodations
must be made for the needs of others. So, one does not have full
control of furnishings, speaker placement, even the types of speakers
permitted. So, yes. Tune the room, or tune the system, both to the
extent possible. Writing for myself, I have found that the larger the
room, the easier the entire process becomes. Tight spaces are the
toughest far-and-away. Setting up in our library (17 x 23 x 9.5) was a
piece-of-cake vs. the living room (half the size) or my radio room (10
x 14 x 9), that last because between the work benches, windows (3),
doors (2), radiators (2) and such there was little room to play. It is
in these situations that sub-sat systems are happiest.

Yes, I use a pre-amp - actually a tuner/pre-amp for my
front-line stereo.

The system I listen to at home for enjoyment is centerpieced by a stereo
receiver. I rarely if ever use any control on it except its speaker
selection facility, to mute the speakers for headphone listening at night.
All the rest, the function selector switch, the volume control, the AM/FM
tuner, the recorder inputs and outputs, are *never* used. *The system volume
control that is used routinely is in a TV set. Media selection is via the TV
set and the two DVRs.

Sure. Fits the purpose nicely.

The only reason why the receiver is not a power amplifier is that the
receiver is the simplest and most economical way to obtain a power amplifier
with remote-control speaker selection and a built-in headphone jack. Note
that this is not a system that I use for most critical listening.

Y'all need a decent tuner-pre-amp. They will have several headphone
jacks included and allow you to have all that perceived convenience
without the need to burn electricity in a power-amp (written with a
smile). And, of course, it is a convenient patch-bay.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA