Pardon my ignorance w/r/t pre-amps v. pre-pros

[WmAx]

Sure there's a difference - there are a lot more features, components, and design effort that goes into a pre-processor compared to a preamp. That adds significantly to the cost. Receivers add even more. Either the price difference between an equivalent preamp and a receiver or pre-processor must be really big, or there are compromises in component quality to meet a price point (or, in many but not all cases, the difference is in markup).

I'm curious as to what 'magical' thing you think makes a stand alone pre-amp superior to one with some included video features(that are properly shielded). There is no measurable evidence to support any claim of audibility difference of which I am aware.

-Chris

 

[mr-ben]

I'm curious as to what 'magical' thing you think makes a stand alone pre-amp superior to one with some included video features(that are properly shielded). There is no measurable evidence to support any claim of audibility difference of which I am aware.

-Chris

I'm not saying they can't sound the same, or that one is always better than the other. I'm just suggesting that at a particular price point (say $1000), a preamp should sound better than a pre-processor or receiver at the same price point, with the exception of those brands with inflated prices.

 

[PENG]

Part of the reasons for receivers to be able to pack so much features and still offer lower prices than preamps is that they are mass produced. Another reason is that preamps aim at people who typically don't mind paying more for perceived superior quality so they tend to have a much higher mark ups. In fact, many people take it for granted that a product is of higher quality if its price is higher.

 

[Seth=L]

Sure there's a difference - there are a lot more features, components, and design effort that goes into a pre-processor compared to a preamp. That adds significantly to the cost. Receivers add even more. Either the price difference between an equivalent preamp and a receiver or pre-processor must be really big, or there are compromises in component quality to meet a price point (or, in many but not all cases, the difference is in markup).

I don't believe you have the information readily available to support a theory that it costs more to design a receiver than a pre/pro. Receiver's don't make huge fundamental changes that often. Usually a part changes (such as amplifier) to decrease costs. Even if it does cost more to design a receiver it likely costs less given it's performance due to the high volume of production comparitively to pre/pro. Because the overall production of a good pre/pro from a company like Parasound or some higher enchalon company you can expect a higher mark up to maximize profit per unit shipped to cover overhead and get some bucks into the owner or owners' hands.

Because of this increase in price given function and even measured performance they have to take a different marketing approach. This kind of marketing is not simple because they can't just make a comercial or make outrageous claims otherwise they would likely be ignored. Only a small few companies can make outrageous claims of performance that in reality are rather undwelming in any sort of advantage (think Bose, Monster Cable). High end audio companies have to play the part and "slow their role" before they can solidify themselves into even a short term manufacturer (in my terms a short term high end company would be like a strong 10-20 years operating). I don't think Bob Carver plans to have Sunfire last much longer before abandoning it in favor of a new approach unless he wants to retire. Bob's sort of the exception to the rule. If Bob feels he's made his money he may let Sunfire be the last of his legacy, if not he'll unleash a new technology he can base a company around. He's a bit overdue if you ask me, but then he might be done.

Emotiva has done a wonderful job of attracting budding audiophiles, and audio nerds alike. As an audio nerd I have not bought into Emotiva for two reasons. Their pictures make them look cheesy, and I've not heard the best in the way of reliability or perfect customer support. A high end company like B&K or Krell needs to have the most alert and helpful customer as possible. Companies like those have to be as thoughtful as possible concerning their customers to make sure they keep their current customers and to earn new ones by building a high level of trust. Basically, if customer service is anything short of better you thought it could possibly be, then they won't last long unless they've got massive funds to just throw away.

I definitely understand the pride in owning high end or esoteric equipment even though it may offer no audible advantage for the user. I understand "prestige" and what it means for people. Like a sports or luxury car, it's not a necessity, it's just nice to have and know that you earned it. If you can afford the purchase the most esoteric and outlandish amplifier without exceeding your financial limitations, far be it from me to judge you for your purchase. If you want to spend thousands on cables because they look nice and have a lifetime guarranty, go ahead.

It's very nice to have nice things if you can afford them.

However...

This forum has a large amount of electric savy users, that will do anything to find where their sound is coming from to save the most amount of money. If you had 10k USD to spend on a stereo and you wanted to get the most from your money in terms of real performance, then you came to the right place. Here you can learn where to put your money to get the best sound possible (within certain limits of constraint), just like an investment. If you want slick, smooth, and shiny; well, it probably going to still sound fantastic.

This forum is largely here to support and supply information/knowledge that will offer the best possible performance per dollar. Clearly it's other purposes are to share insights, ideas, fun, and even relationships with your fellow audio gurus and newcomers to the world of audio.

 

[Seth=L]

I'm not saying they can't sound the same, or that one is always better than the other. I'm just suggesting that at a particular price point (say $1000), a preamp should sound better than a pre-processor or receiver at the same price point, with the exception of those brands with inflated prices.

I believe what Chris is trying to say is that if the RX-V2600 measure's neutral beyond the threshold of what can be audibly heard by any human ear, then who cares if another preamp measured better?

It's also possible that a $1000 preamp and $1000 receiver are not engineered to the same level. The labs and test equipment that Yamaha has at it's disposal are likely to be far superior to any that a small high end manufacturer of separates would possibly have. I imagine millions of dollars are in labs owned and used by Yamaha's technicians and designers.

 

[WmAx]

I'm not saying they can't sound the same, or that one is always better than the other. I'm just suggesting that at a particular price point (say $1000), a preamp should sound better than a pre-processor or receiver at the same price point, with the exception of those brands with inflated prices.

Seth's posts were dead on.

There is NO credible evidence to support the 'better sound' theory you just stated.

I used to use high end amplifiers, pre-amps, etc. Today I use a RX-V2600 as my pre-amp and pro audio amplifiers. There is not one bit of evidence that these units that I use produce any level of coloration or noise that is within the human auditory threshold levels for music listening purposes. I put all resources where they matter these days: the speakers and room acoustics. On those fronts, I have put forth a huge effort.

-Chris

 

[mr-ben]

Ok - I give up. I don't think any of us is going to convince anyone of anything.

 

[WmAx]

Ok - I give up. I don't think any of us is going to convince anyone of anything.

I just require substantial evidence. That's all.....

-Chris

 

[PENG]

Ok - I give up. I don't think any of us is going to convince anyone of anything.

I, for one, am convinced by claims supported by science, engineering and economics (such as how volume affects cost of production). That's why up to this point Chris and Seth's claims sound more convincing than yours that seem to base on "price point".

A preamp that sells for 5 times the price of a prepro may very well have higher quality and/or overdesigned components in them but that does not automatically make it sound better to people. May be to other species but not necessarily human. For example, power amps use much bigger power supplies than preamps but if you replace the transformer in a McIntosh preamp with one that is 10 times larger it will bring the cost way up but may yield no audible difference. Likewise, preamps that uses pure solid gold connectors (probably don't exist) may not sound better (to human) than those that use gold plated ones.

By the way, please do not give up, we can agree to disagree.

 

[mr-ben]

Our difference seems to come from what drives us. Measurements, at least for things other than amplifiers, aren't a big deal to me. I prefer to listen to components, and make decisions based on that instead. There is no real good way to listen though unless you have a good dealer who can let you borrow equipment, or buy from someplace that has a good return policy, so you can drop some new component in at home and compare it. Buying and reselling used works pretty well too.

I've done a number of upgrades, and have listened to many more components than I have ultimately purchased. I have listened carefully to a number of preamps and receivers, and they always sound different. It's more complicated than simply better/worse, and there is some but not a lot of correlation to price. So I have a hard time believing that everything sounds the same, when my experience is that it's not true. Everything sounds different, but pretty much everything sounds good.

 

[Seth=L]

I find it very interesting that people can hear a mysterious unmeasurable difference between components that both measure the same on the bench. It's as if there is some phenomena in preamps and amplifiers that the manufacturers themselves have not discovered the answer too.

 

[WmAx]

Our difference seems to come from what drives us. Measurements, at least for things other than amplifiers, aren't a big deal to me. I prefer to listen to components, and make decisions based on that instead. There is no real good way to listen though unless you have a good dealer who can let you borrow equipment, or buy from someplace that has a good return policy, so you can drop some new component in at home and compare it. Buying and reselling used works pretty well too.

I've done a number of upgrades, and have listened to many more components than I have ultimately purchased. I have listened carefully to a number of preamps and receivers, and they always sound different. It's more complicated than simply better/worse, and there is some but not a lot of correlation to price. So I have a hard time believing that everything sounds the same, when my experience is that it's not true. Everything sounds different, but pretty much everything sounds good.

I'm sure you realize that unless you used level controlled, blinded, randomized trials performed using proper methodology, then simple listening comparisons as are usually performed are not reliable.

No one says everything sounds the same here. The point is that a device that measures good enough to avoid any known threshold break for known human auditory limits in any particular parameter, has no reason to be suspected to be audibly different, within the particular use that such parameters remain under the threshold of audibility. Each parameter (THD, noise, FR, etc.) has extensive perceptual research to establish a known threshold of audibility for music program.

I will point out that under cases where things have measured as such to be under the threshold of human audibility, and when compared with double blinded testing, level matched, using proper statistical analysis, no audible difference could be confirmed. This has been done with CD players, pre-amps, amplifiers and even vinyl put through an ADC->DAC loop and compared to the original analog signal, as well as various other things.

I am aware of your perspective. I used to be an audiophile. I used to use such invalid listening comparisons and believed I could hear all sorts of things. I had the fancy pre-amps and amplifiers, etc.. Through blinded, level matched listening comparisons and extensive research, I realized that much of what I believed was in error.

I will also point out that I have standards for sound reproduction quality that could be considered absurd by many people. Even my 'computer' audio system will easily exceed virtually any multi-tens of thousands of dollars audiophile system in terms of fidelity. I have put thousands of hours into research of credible audio research/papers and my own controlled blinded experiments (not the typical sighted half-arsed experiments people often do) on myself and others in order to further my knowledge and have the ability to set up and build such systems. But I bet you think my main audio system could not be anything but mediocre, since the pre-amp I use is a Yamaha RX-V2600. I even sold of my McIntosh amplifiers and now use Yamaha pro amps.

-Chris

 

[mr-ben]

I'm sure you realize that unless you used level controlled, blinded, randomized trials performed using proper methodology, then simple listening comparisons as are usually performed are not reliable.

Agreed.

No one says everything sounds the same here. The point is that a device that measures good enough to avoid any known threshold break for known human auditory limits in any particular parameter, has no reason to be suspected to be audibly different, within the particular use that such parameters remain under the threshold of audibility. Each parameter (THD, noise, FR, etc.) has extensive perceptual research to establish a known threshold of audibility for music program.

While this seems correct, I haven't yet heard two components that I can't tell apart. Perhaps this is because my listening tests weren't set up properly (although I've tried hard to do this), or I haven't listened to enough components, but I've yet to find two components that I can't tell apart.

I will point out that under cases where things have measured as such to be under the threshold of human audibility, and when compared with double blinded testing, level matched, using proper statistical analysis, no audible difference could be confirmed. This has been done with CD players, pre-amps, amplifiers and even vinyl put through an ADC->DAC loop and compared to the original analog signal, as well as various other things.

I am aware of your perspective. I used to be an audiophile. I used to use such invalid listening comparisons and believed I could hear all sorts of things. I had the fancy pre-amps and amplifiers, etc.. Through blinded, level matched listening comparisons and extensive research, I realized that much of what I believed was in error.

Sure - I've read the studies. I'd love to be a part of one, because as I've said before, I prefer to go by what I've personally experienced rather than what I read in measurements or studies.

But I bet you think my main audio system could not be anything but mediocre, since the pre-amp I use is a Yamaha RX-V2600. I even sold of my McIntosh amplifiers and now use Yamaha pro amps.

Not at all. I haven't heard your Yamaha (no opportunity yet), or any McIntosh stuff (out of my price range, so I haven't even considered listening to them). For all I know the Yamaha sounds better. I don't know if they're any better or worse than what I have, since I haven't heard them myself.

 

[PENG]

While this seems correct, I haven't yet heard two components that I can't tell apart. Perhaps this is because my listening tests weren't set up properly (although I've tried hard to do this), or I haven't listened to enough components, but I've yet to find two components that I can't tell apart.

Would you mind telling us how you set up your listening tests? I used to think I could easily tell the difference between preamps and amps too but that's when I didn't bother doing proper A/B comparisons, let alone BT or DBT.

 

[Biggiesized]

Anybody want to answer my question from a few pages back?

 

[Seth=L]

Anybody want to answer my question from a few pages back?

I do believe we've been trying to uncover that answer, it's just very difficult to supply a definitive answer without showing you, or having you listen to a difference (if one is present). Since we have differing points of view it's almost impossible to read what is said here know which is better. The best we can do is share our points of view and you can take that information and make an informed decision. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I do firmly believe that seperate components are commonly over priced for the performance they give. Emotiva has had a rather poor track record in benchtest noise levels with their pre/pros. I'm not sure if this a problem they have with their preamps, but I would not be willing to take the chance personally. I would much rather go with what is proven.

I would look elsewhere for a quality preamp or preamp processor.

 

[Biggiesized]

I do believe we've been trying to uncover that answer, it's just very difficult to supply a definitive answer without showing you, or having you listen to a difference (if one is present). Since we have differing points of view it's almost impossible to read what is said here know which is better. The best we can do is share our points of view and you can take that information and make an informed decision. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I do firmly believe that seperate components are commonly over priced for the performance they give. Emotiva has had a rather poor track record in benchtest noise levels with their pre/pros. I'm not sure if this a problem they have with their preamps, but I would not be willing to take the chance personally. I would much rather go with what is proven.

I would look elsewhere for a quality preamp or preamp processor.

No, not that one.

You've already addressed my topic question and for that, I owe you much thanks!

I'm talking about my other question...

/where's waldo

 

[Seth=L]

No, not that one.

You've already addressed my topic question and for that, I owe you much thanks!

I'm talking about my other question...

/where's waldo

Which question (other than "where's waldo?")?

 

[mr-ben]

Would you mind telling us how you set up your listening tests? I used to think I could easily tell the difference between preamps and amps too but that's when I didn't bother doing proper A/B comparisons, let alone BT or DBT.

I tried several things to compare my preamp to my receiver, all properly level matched with my trusty Radio Shack SPL meter. I tried directly replacing one with another, but heard no difference. I tried putting one component in the processor loop or tape loop of the other, which changed the sound for the worse when the extra component was in the loop. Finally I tried splitting my CD input to both, and sending the outputs to the same amplifier. My amp has both balanced and unbalanced inputs, so I can have them both attached at the same time, just not both on at the same time. The preamp used the balanced cables, which some will argue is an unfair advantage, but others won't. Either way I can pretty easily switch between them by turning one off and the other on while listening. This is not blind, but after several hours I figured out what to listen for, and felt I had a good feeling for the differences. I know it's not a perfect test, and so I can't be sure that what I hear different isn't in my head, but I felt comfortable that a difference was there, and was in favor of the preamp. It is not a really significant difference.

I also compared a stand-alone turntable preamp with the built-in versions non-blindly. This was very different, with the stand-alone performing much worse.

I'm planning on having someone bring a nice preamp which was 3x the cost of mine over someday soon. I'd like to do a completely blind test when that happens, and maybe learn something in the process.

 

[PENG]

What happened to the RX-V2XXX line from Yamaha?

Not sure what you are asking but I thought that line was replaced by the RX-V3XXX.