There’s absolutely nothing wrong with liking the sonic signature of a piece of kit … myself I still have a total man-crush on the sound of the big old Krell amplifiers of the 90’s (knowing full-well they’re not by any means perfect) and, one day, I WILL have that “discussion” with my other half as to why a big ugly hot thing has appeared in the corner of the living room and how much I trust that she will grow to love( * ) it and it’s many facets, just as she loves( * ) me and my many facets…
At the end of the day no electronic circuit is totally transparent … any piece of audio kit, no matter how good, will affect the signal going through it and it is always possible (and totally fine) that you simply prefer the “sound” of a particular piece of kit (or brand of kit).
Phil
( * ) - love / tolerate … pfft … it’s just semantics … and as they say, it’s easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.
Yeah … I’ve been keeping a bit of an eye out as to what is happening with them myself as there’s an FPB700 that I have known about for quite a while but it has a fault that needs to be repaired back at base first.
The folks at WestminsterLab used to think that a preamp is not needed since we have digital volume control and the addition of a preamp has downside. Starting at 9:06 the founder explains why they changed their view.
The Quest costs an arm and a leg BTW but once it’s heard it cannot be unheard. There are no second hand units to be found, unfortunately. The interview is in English.
I was hoping that there would be a clear explanation of why they changed their opinion . However all they say is that after research they developed a preamplifier design. They assert this is an advance but, aside from the ability to add modules for RCA input or various types of phono equaliser there seems no fundamental discussion of why a preamp sounds better ( or not).
What do I not like about Quest? It only has remote control , no physical buttons. Remotes fail, get lost etc. Will you be able to get a replacement remote in ten years even if the brand survives?
NB: be careful with the English subtitles which use “volts” instead of
"watts etc.
As said you really just need to try with and without for yourself.
As many things will alter the outcome.
But as been mentioned, set up both ways in the best configuration you can, and then just listen.
Obviously it also depends on what pre amp and amp you have to do this.
I still use a pre amp in my vitus sia030, but this was far superior to the naim 552d pre and 500dr amp.
But if i didn’t have other sources, then i would certainly be not using a pre amp. I would go find an amp that best suited my speakers snd gave me the dound i wanted.
Cheers dunc
The interviewer moved on to the next topic without letting the founder explicitly state what he was implying with the description of the design: shorter signal pathway and fewer components lead to less distortion and mitigate the downside of adding the Quest between the DAC and the power amp/active speakers.
On your second point, that’s a real risk that one has to weigh in the decision making. I don’t feel comfortable about it either.
The best way for me to say what the impact of plugging the Quest between the dCS DAC and the Avantgarde Acoustic active speakers was is to say, all the Quest did was to decompress the sound that was already there. It may have to do with this iTRON technology of the speakers that it worked so well.
The dealer said he used to have other preamps that were a lot more expensive than the Quest but he wasn’t happy with the sound.
I agree with Duncan. My “complete” approach, positively influenced by @PAR and @still-one and others on prior threads is:
(a) Match speakers to room
(b) Mach amp to speakers (or buy an amp so good that it “matches” almost all speakers)
(c) Get the best source(s) you can afford
(d) If only one source, run direct
FWIW, I’ve been running my 3 box Vivaldi into my MBL 9008a mono’s at 6v and periodically swapping in my Halcro DM10 pre. Cables are Wireworld Eclipse 8 XLR for all i/c’s.
There’s a marginal preference for the system with the pre, but it’s very marginal, akin to a Vivaldi filter change. I hear little or no change in the drive or energy in the music and certainly nothing I could pick blind reliably.
As always, pre or no pre is system ( and personal taste ) dependent.
I understand now that there is downside with a preamp but system dependent it may make a difference for discernibly better micro-dynamics and detail. Even the WestminsterLab founder agrees that there is downside so I’m getting the extended carbon pack with the Quest for better shielding. That’s what the dealer has, too.
Perhaps it might be more appropriate to suggest that you may simply prefer the effect / audible fingerprint that a preamp has on your system in the same way that you would prefer one speaker over another or one amplifier over another…?
I would put it this way, Phil, if I could test passive Avantgarde Acoustic speakers with and without a preamp. Their ZERO speakers only come with this active iTRON technology and my hypothesis is that they definitely require a preamp and ideally one that keeps distortion to a minimum.
The dealer has a pair of Uno and Duo speakers in his showroom but they are active as well with this iTRON technology. No way to test the hypothesis.