Beepre marching question
- Thread starter Alby0521
- Start date
Paul Joppa
Moderator
Based on the ST35 specs (1.0v sensitivity for full power, input impedance 500K ohms) it looks like a pretty good match to me.
Just curiosity, what speakers are you planning to use?
Just curiosity, what speakers are you planning to use?
Thanks for the answer.
I don’t own a st35. My system is Beepre that goes into stereomour2 into khorn and the combination is wonderful.
A friend has a st35 and asked me to borrow him the preamp to try so I was wondering if anybody had a good experience with that combo.
I believe he as a pair of forte2.
Best
AB
I don’t own a st35. My system is Beepre that goes into stereomour2 into khorn and the combination is wonderful.
A friend has a st35 and asked me to borrow him the preamp to try so I was wondering if anybody had a good experience with that combo.
I believe he as a pair of forte2.
Best
AB
I hope this doesn't come off as contradictory, or offense, but I really am curious and feel like I'm missing something.Why would one need or want to run a active pre amp to basically attenuate the source signal? I get impedance matching , but why the gain? I ran my paramours directly from my phono preamp for over a year while I debated about a preamp and decided I needed a passive ( 4 db insertion loss ) to get rid if the hair trigger volume control. Just about everything puts out more than 1v. It seems counterintuitive. What am I missing? Mike
Paul Joppa
Moderator
There are a few occasions where one would want more gain than usual. Some recordings are made at a low signal level; phones and portable music players often have a lower output than other sources; occasionally you want to hear a quiet passage more clearly, perhaps to catch something in the lyrics for instance.
Sometimes one has low-efficiency speakers. Because SETs will overload more gracefully than solid-state amps, it is not unreasonable to crank the gain into overload on peak level passages to make the main signal loud enough. I think this is one reason it is said that SET watts are bigger than solid-state watts.
And many people - not a majority but more than a few - just like the sound with an active preamp in the chain. I am not aware of any solid science why that should be. I've heard lots of guesses, some of them even plausible, but none with any real evidence showing whether they are true or not. I have learned to believe that people hear what they say they hear, and I respect that even when I can't explain it.
Clearly, these are not big issues for most audiophiles. :^)
Sometimes one has low-efficiency speakers. Because SETs will overload more gracefully than solid-state amps, it is not unreasonable to crank the gain into overload on peak level passages to make the main signal loud enough. I think this is one reason it is said that SET watts are bigger than solid-state watts.
And many people - not a majority but more than a few - just like the sound with an active preamp in the chain. I am not aware of any solid science why that should be. I've heard lots of guesses, some of them even plausible, but none with any real evidence showing whether they are true or not. I have learned to believe that people hear what they say they hear, and I respect that even when I can't explain it.
Clearly, these are not big issues for most audiophiles. :^)
Gerry E.
Member
Mike - I have asked this question many times! I even went from an LDR-based passive line-stage to an active preamp and then back to the same LDR passive (an updated version). The LDR passive had a level of transparency that was compelling. However, I'm back to an active line-stage again and can sum up the reasons why in one word: <u><b>dynamics</b></u>.ludddite said:
The dynamic contrast is significantly better with an active preamp. I'll leave it up to the techies to explain why but I can say that with certain recordings, it's a make or break difference. BTW, my system has ideal conditions for a passive - plenty of gain and excellent impedance matching. With my current active line-stage, I'm giving up little to no transparency as compared to the passive.
Gerry
ludddite said:
Hi mike.
You if I understand well you are asking why I put the Beepre in front of the Stereomour II.
If this is your doubt, we’ll first to have a bit more gain to play with (I use a denon 301r which is quite low output).
Second and most important is that the system like that sound so much better.
I 100% agree with Gerry. Dynamics are just so much more detailed. I started with the Stereomour directly from the phono preamp (Eros) and then along the way I added the Beepre. Now I have for obvious that this would have been a good match and yes it’s a really good match.
My question was more of somebody had experience in matching the st35 with the Beepre and looks like it can be a good match.
If we try it out I’ll post here.
Best
AB
Adrian
New member
I have yet to try an active preamp in my system. Anything between the original signal (vinyl groove, etc.) and the human ear has the potential to get in the way of the sound. Sometimes this is perceived as good and sometimes bad.
If it isn't there, it can't be bad; however, I may be missing out on something good.
Currently I have sufficient gain through a Quintet Black MC, a Rothwell MCL SUT, an EROS, a Submissive, and Paramounts through some Blumensteins.
I'm very pleased with the transparency and clarity of the sound.
I want to supplement with an active preamp like the BeePre to compliment the Paramounts. Money and available real estate to accommodate the Beepre holds me back for now.
If it isn't there, it can't be bad; however, I may be missing out on something good.
Currently I have sufficient gain through a Quintet Black MC, a Rothwell MCL SUT, an EROS, a Submissive, and Paramounts through some Blumensteins.
I'm very pleased with the transparency and clarity of the sound.
I want to supplement with an active preamp like the BeePre to compliment the Paramounts. Money and available real estate to accommodate the Beepre holds me back for now.
