Listen to music and hear the football score updates at the same - it's an additional feature! :)

Nailed it

It's possible that some DACs have poor output impedance but from an electrical engineering perspective, having to add an entire pre-amp just because of some impedance matching issue is extremely silly. I would consider such DAC to be poorly designed. Designing a DAC with low output impedance to drive long cables is trivial and costing a few pennies on the DAC cost vs. a preamp adds a cost of buckets of pennies. Rather, what Paul is talking about is more likely "musical tube distortion".

Nailed it. Sounds like you have an excellent setup.

Mutiny, not intervention. ;)

@@connorduke4619 :)

I know they had some vintage Sony floorstanders in there.

Your measuring equipment is the result of only a few decades of development. The modern human central nervous system has been a work in progress for a l-o-o-o-o-t longer (I won't go into hominid paleo-biology here, a little careful research on your part can reveal explanations much better than I can give; with the caveat that there is also a tremendous amount of mis-information and outright nonsense out there these days, but you likely know that already). We listen to music, live and reproduced, with the aforementioned human central nervous systems (which, though based on the same general template, are all unique to some extent to each individual), not electronic spectrum analyzers et al. Keep working on things though, maybe some creative thinking outside of the proverbial box will lead to a new level of enlightenment.

A pre-amp must exist in a stereo system. You can have a receiver, that will include a pre-amp, as well as a tuner, CD player, phono-amp, and stereo-amp, all nursing off of a single power supply. Or, you can have separate boxes, each dedicated to performing a single task. Separate components (good ones) will sound better than a receiver. That is why the better the stereo, the more boxes are involved. For example, you can have your power amp in your receiver, or as a separate stereo amp. But when you want even better sound quality, you get monoblock amps, each dedicated to a single speaker, and each having its own dedicated power supply So you can have your pre-amp built-in to your CD player, or you can have your pre-amp be a separate box. The latter will be better, if it is a quality pre-amp. As to measurements: There are no instruments that can measure everything the human ear measures. Yes, there are instruments that can measure sound better than the human ear, but only for the specific sound aspect for which that test is designed to measure. If there are 50 different lab tests to measure sound, then there are probably 500 more tests that do not exist, that our ears can measure. People that test sound never (to my knowledge) use the most important lab equipment: A professionally set-up high-end stereo and their ears. This is understandable, as such stereos are wildly expensive, and lab technicians do not have access to them, unless they know someone or have a high-end stereo store available to them. And I suspect that lab technicians never heard of PS Audio, or Aesthetix, or Vandersteen, or Wilson, or Audio Research, etc, so they never heard what their lab tests are missing. But I lay 100 to 1 odds that they all heard of Bose, and 20 to 1 odds that most of them believe that Bose makes the best stereo equipment that money can buy. Cheers!

You guys are funny. The human ear is fairly limited and easily damaged. It deteriorates quickly over the years... All you are discussing is the perception that happens in the brain and that is staggeringly inaccurate as well, so please, please enjoy music, but don’t make your head out to be some kind of super powered audio analysis device. People mix up two things: Yes what sounds nice to you is most important. So listen for yourself and enjoy. But be so realistic to know what you perceive is incredibly inaccurate and always will be. So to be sure you get as close to the artists intent you should probably use equipment that tests as well as you can get, but consider that there comes a point, pretty quickly in fact, where any “improvements” are well beyond human hearing and all you’re doing at that point is tricking your brain to THINK you can actually hear the differences when in fact independent research has shown again and again that you can’t.

@@TofumanFC3S Yes, the human ear is fairly limited. And the sky is blue. Both are true, and both are unrelated to whether or not a separate, dedicated box, designed specifically and solely for attenuating the analog signal, is inferior or is superior to the bundled pre-amp / attenuater that is built into a CD player. Yes, human hearing deteriorates over time. And also, yes, is that even our deteriorated ears hear and measure aspects of sound that the lab test do not. Yes, many people have staggeringly inaccurate brains. But almost without exception, anyone's brain will interpret what their ears hear as being better and more accurate when hearing music via a quality, dedicated pre-amp. If I have two stereos: One is from Walmart, and one is a flagship dream system from a high-end stereo store, well... No matter whether I have the hearing of a 15 year hold, a 35 year old, or an 85 year old, as long as my hearing is not completely shot, I will easily hear how much better the dream stereo sounds. This is the case with a dedicated pre-amp vs. a CD player's built-in pre-amp (albeit to a lesser degree -- the the difference will still be unmistakably better with the quality, dedicated pre-amp). If what we hear is always incredibly inaccurate, then listening to a live performance in your living-room will be highly inaccurate. Yet, it will sound amazing. The dedicated, quality pre-amp gets you closer to that real, live performance in your living-room. But your statement conveys that it is pointless, because our hearing is inaccurate. Your outlook is self-defeating. As to improvements that are well beyond human hearing, and your position on overall sound quality, you convey that improving sound quality is a fruitless endeavor. I suspect that you never heard a truly exceptional high-end stereo, professionally set-up in a treated room. I have, in my local high-end audio store. I am friends with the owner, and whenever I visit his store, he treats me to a listening session (assuming the room is not in use). On my last visit, he treated me to listening to a dream system that used the Innuos Statement transport player. If I went by your viewpoint of music reproduction, then I would have to discount how amazing that transport improved the sound quality -- because my ears are so inaccurate. But the improvement over what I already knew to be spectacular sound quality was so good, that it is difficult to listen to digital music without the Innuos Statement transport in the process chain. So my ears, as inaccurate as they might be, knows how much better that stereo sounded with that transport / player. And I was not alone. Other customers were all bowled over, too. Our ears and our brains are a constant. So better equipment is better, regardless of our ears and our brains. You can make a case for it still being inaccurate. My perception tells me otherwise. Yes, I know it can never be 100% accurate as the real band. I suspect that you never heard such a stereo, and never experienced your ears hearing a person standing in front of you that is not there. If you were blindfolded, you would swear that the artist was standing there. Few people have heard such sound quality. I am lucky to have that store 45 minutes from me, and the owner as a friend. Until you hear it, please refrain from downplaying the differences in equipment being subject to our staggering inaccurate ears and brains. Cheers!

@@NoEgg4u My comment was directed at the commentators above, including yourself, based specifically on these sentiments: “...and the human ear tells you more than the test equipment...” “...measuring equipment has only a few decades of development. The modern human central nervous system [...] longer...” “People [...] never use the most important lab equipment: A professionally set up high-end stereo and their ears.” At no point did I pass any judgement on wether a pre-amp should or should not be included in any set up. I merely said that since the senses and brain are so untrustworthy, one might quickly attribute a change in listening experience to variations in gear when in reality it’s very likely to be your mind playing tricks on you. It’s the reason why people will spend 50k on diamond dust infused “Audiophile” cables and hear improvements. Your comparison with supermarket grade audio equipment makes little sense as it’s most likely not anywhere near the point where diminishing returns come into effect. I assumed seeing this channel is dedicated to quality components we could at least have some standards of adequate gear. The fact that you claim your (or our) brain is a constant shows why I can’t trust your user experience to be factually correct and makes it essentially useless to any objective decision making. I therefor will default to truly objective measurements in my search for constants. Please refrain from downplaying the importance of technology in audio tech (Wow! I know...) when discussing your super human hearing. Especially since, again, it wasn’t me who made any generalizations about wether a pre-amp is advantageous or not. Cheers!

get a good pre-amp with a optical input and throw the idiotic DAC out of the chain

Take the digital out of a CD player into a DAC that has a volume controlled output to the amp. Many have this and remote contolled.

I am not sure but I think that you would have to have a DAC with a volume control. CD to DAC to Amp.

...or phono out from CD with vol control :) some CDs had fixed AND variable outputs or any CD and power amp with variable inputs 😊

@@audiolover News to me. I never heard of a CD player with variable output. Never saw one. Google!! Here I come!!!

@@charlescalkins4732 sure...Kenwood DPF-7002 with 8x1702 burr brown... I am looking at it now... and I have the volume control from the remote control, nice feature 😉👍

Yes, some people like tube distortion and it’s alright.

Wadia's postulate: a good preamp cuts RF noise, and thus sounds better than DAC to power. Wadia DAC is better in RF noise suppression than other DACs. So so it sounds as good as a good preamp.

In my setup the distortion as you call it seemed to be coming from the dac.With the preamp between it & the power amps it just sounded less cheap & edgy.

@@azzinny Using a pre-amp as a low pass filter is a rather silly use of a pre-amp. If a DAC is outputting >20kHz noise at a level causing power amp issues, the solution is to throw out the DAC and get a properly designed DAC. Some DACs allow settings for the output filter, and before throwing it out, at least try change those settings.

No doubt that is often the situation. I think it also comes down to impedance matching and drive. The only real way to tell is to try it with a great pre amp and without. Another option is to just go without and be happy in your ignorance and savings.

been a while, hasnt it?

Never skip a good preamp!

forget the DAC and don't waste money for cables - optical connection without a silly analog conversion early in the chain

I am also trying to use the same approach. I recently bought a SS dedicated Power amp, now trying to decide on tube preamp. Although most are out my budget. Only Schiit Freya+ is within the upper limit of my budget, but hardly ever available in their European shop. Any recommendations?

@@kfernandes86 It really depends what type of hifi setup you have and what preamp functions you need. For a multi source system (including turntable, cd, streamer, dvd,TV etc) then the Freya is a fab pre amp for the price and hard to beat...but is still a bit pricy, so you could look out for a secondhand Freya or croft as they are really good.british audio company.....and there are also some very reasonable Chinese pre amps...but the usual concerns apply. However... if you are like me and only use a single source ( I just have a bluesound node 2i streamer... which is the hub for my other gear)....then a tube headphone amp or tube buffer can work really well... as many have a preamp (input/output) stage too! However... a friend recommended very very cheap but surprisingly good Chinese single input/output pre amp called FX audio tube 01 ...or tube 03. The latter 03 has additional tone controls which is the one I got Now the caveat is ...that although the FX audio is surprisingly well made product ...the tubes and power brick are not great... So need replacing with better (but still very cheap) tube upgrades and a better wall brick PSU or separate Power supply unit...then they sing and sound surprisingly good. So I have left a forum link for you to check out. But be warned it's quite long thread as many people have got into these little units and so have loads of suggestions and info. audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/fx-audio-6j1-tube-preamp-a-31-wonder.848535/ But there will be no hifi bragging rights...except for the great sound LOL

@@humanitech thanks a lot for your comments. I think I will try the FX Audio as a temporary solution. (Till I sell some older stuff to buy a better option). the only thing is I use 3 sources - LP, CD and DAC. so its a bit annoying to keep swapping cables as most of these models don't offer source selector. Croft was also on my short list. I am based in Poland, and here there is also a small company called WBA that also makes preamplifiers that I will consider.

@@kfernandes86 No problem....just to add if you are thinking of getting an FX...I found after tube rolling different tubes that my two favourites are (1) Russian voskhod 6j38p and also the Voskhod 6j1p ev's which are also great tubes but the 6j's are a little lighter on bass response...the Mullards equivalents were woolly and disappointing ...but GE are OK too! Luckily all tubes are pretty cheap (unless you want to try some of the more exotic new old stock stuff)! Note.. some people prefer to buy tubes as tested matched pairs and pay a little more money...however I just buy 8 tested but unmatched tubes for the same money or cheaper...and they work great. Oh and remember to gently clean / scrape the pins (back to shiny metal) before fitting. As most tube are New old stock so the pins oxidize to a dull grey which reduces the contact in the holders. Sorry for the waffle and Good luck whatever tube amp you find ...and keep checking fleaBay for other secondhand tube preamps options and bargains.

@@humanitech thanks for the advice! yes, checking eBay and other local listings is part of my daily routine now :P I don't play to go down the road of New Old stock, as the prices are too much for me. Yes, I have heard good things about the Russian brands. Did you try Electro-Harmonix? I have pretty much narrowed down my choice to Schiit Freya (although low probability here in Europe), Croft Acoustics and there are 2 Polish companies here that also have some models that they make to order for around 650-1000 Euros depending on how you spec it. But if I spend that much, I promised myself I would first sell my current Integrated amplifier (Atoll IN100) and also a spare set of Acoustic Research speakers I have (for around 200 Euro) to finance this purchase.

technically they are and I still don't get why the fuck one would convert to analog that early in the chain and then suffer from grounding issues and what not on the analog side

@@Harald_Reindl thought so. Just wanted to clarify...

That’s what makes us music lovers. We need to be happy listening to music not what other people tell us should make us happy.

@@stimpy1226 Yes, agree 100%. Whatever makes us most happy is the right solution.

That is why this whole measurement discussion of the believers of technical sheets is BS

@@bikemike1118 yes the proof is in the listening

Possibly because there are so many undiscovered physical phenomenon going on in our circuits. Measurements are important only to a certain extent that’s when the era takes over and then conjunction can help to finish the Designer’s final product.

@@stimpy1226 spot on mate!

Agreed!

if it adds whatever which is not on the record it's not Hifi by definition and if you need to add something treat your room proper with absorbers AND diffusors instead throwing random devices in the chain praying they add something unspecified

@@Harald_Reindl Wrong.. It is still hifi. Hifi only means high fidelity... Nothing more, nothing less. And systems cak of course habe high fidelity regardless it it "adds" something or not. You don't add anything with diffusers etc.. You just fix the issues that was wrong with the room in the first place..

@@Oystein87 nonsense, in both sentences! Hifi means you hear as exact as possible what was recorded diffusors ADD something: diffuse reflections while absorbers take away any reflections and as this diffuse reflection was not on the record it was added - it's that simple

@@Harald_Reindl No.. Hifi litteraly means high fidelity and it actually says nothing about adding or removing something... Just that it's capable of sounding close to the original. Let me rephrase...: Diffusers CORRECT things that are wrong with the room but do not add anything while absorbers absorbe. And as the diffuser correct a flaud in the room so the sound is more correct then it did not add anything...🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ That's kinda the whole point with room treatment...😅 So you are contradicting yourself here...

I think that this is the 6th or 7th time that he's "answered" this question.

@@FireTriode yep... 🤷🏻

What did he say was a mysterious phenomenon?

@@Bob-Fields He didn't. But it is always implied. Putting your music through a vacuum tube does what? Or an audio transformer where one is not needed does what?

Why not leave out the pepper. All of the best steak houses in this country especially Peter Luger use salt and butter in 900 degree European Ovens.

@@stimpy1226 Feel free to do as pleases you the most. I do wonder if that butter is salted or unsalted, if salted it seems redundant. :D

@@NotOnYourLife Not sure Jack but you can call them in Brooklyn New York and ask. Regardless, the steak tastes incredible and they probably compensate if they’re using salted butter by using less salt. They are the number one steakhouse in the country for over 30 years. I suggest if you have a Netflix Account watch the New York episode of Somebody Feed Phil. The first segment, Massimo Bottura named named the world’s greatest chef twice is swooning over PL’s steaks and other dishes (He wasn’t wild about the salmon but this is a steakhouse). I think you’ll really enjoy this whole series if you enjoy great food.