trotsky wrote:


ScottW wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


With your hi-fi I can believe that. Buy a real preamp.



I am considering it. My Yamaha has an intermittent output and I
don't have the time to look into it.
I would like simple phono preamp with enough drive for my
passive attenuator.



Passive preamps = passive sound quality. Always.

****ing guy = ****ing advices. Always.

"Lionel" wrote in message

trotsky wrote:


ScottW wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
...

With your hi-fi I can believe that. Buy a real preamp.

I am considering it. My Yamaha has an intermittent output and I
don't have the time to look into it.


On paper the Parasound PPH-110 looks good. Thing is, they don't specify its
gain in a meaningful way. Price seems reasonable enough. I'm sure it would
drive a line-level input on Scott's Yamaha.

The manufacturer's pedigree seems good.

http://www.parasound.com/products/sp...h100specs.html

http://www.audioadvisor.com/store/pr...0&InfoType=1&P
ageTitle=Specifications

I would like simple phono preamp with enough drive for my
passive attenuator.

It's not clear that the PPH-100 has enough output to drive a power amp
directly.

http://www.parasound.com/pdfs/PPH-100Brochure.pdf says that it has enough
gain to drive "line-drive preamps" which is a hopeful sign.

Passive preamps = passive sound quality. Always.

Isn't "passive sound" just another way of saying "sonically transparent"?

****ing guy = ****ing advices. Always.

Really. Only Singh would be so stupid as to come out against the most
distortion-free form of audio level control known to man.

My recollection of history is that his opinion of them REALLY went into the
commode when he heard that Pinkerton and I both favor them.

I suspect Singh's real problem with passive preamps is that they don't
facilitate driving power amps into gross clipping.

Arny Krueger wrote:

Really. Only Singh would be so stupid as to come out against the most
distortion-free form of audio level control known to man.



Arny, you can't prove that distortion can be heard in a DBT. You're
making the ABX test sound like trash again.

"trotsky" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

Really. Only Singh would be so stupid as to come out against the most
distortion-free form of audio level control known to man.

Arny, you can't prove that distortion can be heard in a DBT.

Anybody who wants to hear that distortion can be heard in a DBT need only
visit:

http://www.pcabx.com/technical/nonlinear/index.htm

You're making the ABX test sound like trash again.

I'll leave that for the individual listeners to decide for themselves.

Arny Krueger wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message


Arny Krueger wrote:


Really. Only Singh would be so stupid as to come out against the most
distortion-free form of audio level control known to man.


Arny, you can't prove that distortion can be heard in a DBT.


Anybody who wants to hear that distortion can be heard in a DBT need only
visit:

http://www.pcabx.com/technical/nonlinear/index.htm


So you're saying two preamps that aren't broken can be heard to have
different sounds of their own? You are trashing ABX! This is a
breakthrough. When did you finally realize the ABX concept was a
complete scam?


You're making the ABX test sound like trash again.


I'll leave that for the individual listeners to decide for themselves.


Not good enough. Which two preamps can you diffentiate between? Is
another loser leaves bet in order?

"trotsky" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message


Arny Krueger wrote:


Really. Only Singh would be so stupid as to come out against the
most distortion-free form of audio level control known to man.


Arny, you can't prove that distortion can be heard in a DBT.


Anybody who wants to hear that distortion can be heard in a DBT need
only visit:

http://www.pcabx.com/technical/nonlinear/index.htm

So you're saying two preamps that aren't broken can be heard to have
different sounds of their own?

In my book any preamp that audibly colors sound is broken. You know that!

You are trashing ABX!

How?

This is a
breakthrough. When did you finally realize the ABX concept was a
complete scam?

With logical leaps like that Singh, you should take a stab at jumping the
Grand Canyon!

You're making the ABX test sound like trash again.

I'll leave that for the individual listeners to decide for
themselves.

Not good enough. Which two preamps can you diffentiate (sic) between?

Somehow I find that the Sun does not rise and set on preamp listening tests
that are positive for audible differences.

Is another loser leaves bet in order?

You're a proven welcher on bets like those Singh. Why would anybody trust
you?

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Lionel" wrote in message

trotsky wrote:


ScottW wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
...

With your hi-fi I can believe that. Buy a real preamp.

I am considering it. My Yamaha has an intermittent output and I
don't have the time to look into it.


On paper the Parasound PPH-110 looks good. Thing is, they don't specify its
gain in a meaningful way. Price seems reasonable enough. I'm sure it would
drive a line-level input on Scott's Yamaha.

Except the Yamaha has an intermittent main output and is coming out.
I want a phono preamp that can drive my passive attenuator into a
Krell KSA-150 power amp. Im fine with my CD into the passive and don't
need to add a preamp in that path.

If not that, then a pre-amp with phono and I'll add a source switch on
the Krell though this is not my preferred option.

ScottW

ScottW wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...

"Lionel" wrote in message


trotsky wrote:


ScottW wrote:


"trotsky" wrote in message
...



With your hi-fi I can believe that. Buy a real preamp.



I am considering it. My Yamaha has an intermittent output and I
don't have the time to look into it.


On paper the Parasound PPH-110 looks good. Thing is, they don't specify its
gain in a meaningful way. Price seems reasonable enough. I'm sure it would
drive a line-level input on Scott's Yamaha.


Except the Yamaha has an intermittent main output and is coming out.
I want a phono preamp that can drive my passive attenuator into a
Krell KSA-150 power amp.


Okay, that sounds vomit worthy.

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Okay, that sounds vomit worthy.


What was it you said recently? Something about commenting on
equipment you haven't heard I believe.
You are the single most hypocritical person I have ever
encountered.

ScottW

Scottieborg said:

You are the single most hypocritical person I have ever
encountered.

That's not true. The best Gregipus can attain is a tie.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
news


Scottieborg said:

You are the single most hypocritical person I have ever
encountered.

That's not true. The best Gregipus can attain is a tie.

I continue to give Greg the benefit of the doubt by granting
him "person" classification. But in the open class, you may be
correct.

ScottW

ScottW wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Okay, that sounds vomit worthy.



What was it you said recently? Something about commenting on
equipment you haven't heard I believe.


I've heard KSA-150s, and I have heard numerous passive preamps. Thus,
you're lying.


You are the single most hypocritical person I have ever
encountered.


Oh sure, your "I don't know a goddamned thing about audio but please
don't tell me that fact" stance doesn't count, right?

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


ScottW wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Okay, that sounds vomit worthy.



What was it you said recently? Something about commenting
on
equipment you haven't heard I believe.


I've heard KSA-150s, and I have heard numerous passive preamps.
Thus,
you're lying.

All passive preamps sound alike I suppose. What is driving the
passive or the load has no bearing on the results at all I
suppose.

Tell us you don't think the sound of an amp can be at all
influenced by the load it drives.

For you to think you can carve out the pieces of a system whose
component performances are interactive is stupid beyond belief.

However, if you use benign load speakers, high input impedance
active preamps to drive high impedance amps you might have a
point. Each block of a type is interchangeable without
imparting anything on the next block.
Sort of like "Stereo by Lego".

Who else around here advocates that sort of system design? Let
me think...... Oh yeah. Howard.
Nice one Singh. I think you should change your company name to
something a little more representative of your system philosophy.
Stereo by Lego, owned and operated by the worlds former
preeminent audio display man.




You are the single most hypocritical person I have ever
encountered.

Oh sure, your "I don't know a goddamned thing about audio but
please
don't tell me that fact" stance doesn't count, right?

Wrong. However your stance, "I know everything about audio
including the right personal preferences so don't tell me what
you like" is about as hypocritical as it gets.

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Lionel" wrote in message

trotsky wrote:


ScottW wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
...

With your hi-fi I can believe that. Buy a real preamp.

I am considering it. My Yamaha has an intermittent output and I
don't have the time to look into it.


On paper the Parasound PPH-110 looks good. Thing is, they don't
specify its gain in a meaningful way. Price seems reasonable enough.
I'm sure it would drive a line-level input on Scott's Yamaha.

Except the Yamaha has an intermittent main output and is coming out.
I want a phono preamp that can drive my passive attenuator into a
Krell KSA-150 power amp. Im fine with my CD into the passive and don't
need to add a preamp in that path.

If not that, then a pre-amp with phono and I'll add a source switch on
the Krell though this is not my preferred option.

Except in your rush to judgement Scotty, you missed the part where I wrote
this:

http://www.parasound.com/pdfs/PPH-100Brochure.pdf says that it has enough
gain to drive "line-drive preamps" which is a hopeful sign.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

http://www.parasound.com/pdfs/PPH-100Brochure.pdf says that it
has enough
gain to drive "line-drive preamps" which is a hopeful sign.


Not to me. Gain and drive aren't related. And having enough
gain to drive the high impedance input of an active preamp isn't
what I need.

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:qXXhb.19127$gi2.17294@fed1read01
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

http://www.parasound.com/pdfs/PPH-100Brochure.pdf says that it has
enough gain to drive "line-drive preamps" which is a hopeful sign.


Not to me. Gain and drive aren't related.

The typical "line-drive preamp" has low or zero gain.

A nd having enough
gain to drive the high impedance input of an active preamp isn't
what I need.

Presumably you want to drive the input of a power amp, which is high
compared to the output impedance and load driving capabilities of a phono
preamp or passive controller.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:qXXhb.19127$gi2.17294@fed1read01
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

http://www.parasound.com/pdfs/PPH-100Brochure.pdf says that
it has
enough gain to drive "line-drive preamps" which is a hopeful
sign.


Not to me. Gain and drive aren't related.

The typical "line-drive preamp" has low or zero gain.

My Yamaha C-60 has some gain as it is capable of 10V on the
primary output.
It still has a bit of trouble driving the Quads to decent sound
levels through the passive (turned to min attenuation).
I doubt I will find a phono stage with more drive. I guess I'll
have to bypass the passive.

ScottW