Passives better than poor actives yes, but lack the weight/fullness of the better actives IMO. [nt] - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Are active preamps a pointless appendage of a bygone age? - L.D. 10:48:57 04/9/06 (66)

New thought on the matter (Charles Hansen please read). - morricab 02:12:13 04/13/06 (1)

Re: New thought on the matter (Charles Hansen please read). - Charles Hansen 08:27:28 04/13/06 (0)

I've done away with all preamps - no passive, no active. - pburke 15:19:58 04/11/06 (2)

Re: I've done away with all preamps - no passive, no active. - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 15:58:54 04/11/06 (1)

Re: I've done away with all preamps - no passive, no active. - pburke 18:09:06 04/11/06 (0)

Passives better than poor actives yes, but lack the weight/fullness of the better actives IMO. [nt] - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 04/11/0613:25:12 04/11/06 (0)

Nope. - hukkfinn 20:09:50 04/10/06 (0)

Re: Are active preamps a pointless appendage of a bygone age? - Jim McShane 10:00:38 04/10/06 (0)

Usually.. - Bare 08:21:50 04/10/06 (0)

I've gone back to active - Charles Hansen 08:17:18 04/10/06 (28)

Why do you think this is the case? - mkuller 11:49:07 04/11/06 (21)

Re: Why do you think this is the case? - Charles Hansen 14:27:07 04/11/06 (20)

You didn't answer the question... - mkuller 14:50:03 04/11/06 (19)

Nobody really knows the answer to the question "Why?" - Charles Hansen 19:17:16 04/11/06 (18)

Re: Nobody really knows the answer to the question "Why?" - anthonyh 10:45:30 04/12/06 (16)

Re: Nobody really knows the answer to the question "Why?" - LarryI 11:51:15 04/12/06 (10)

Re: Nobody really knows the answer to the question "Why?" - morricab 01:55:55 04/13/06 (0)

I too, am still wondering how much gain overkill is necessary (nt) - E-Stat 20:09:06 04/12/06 (8)

Re: I too, am still wondering how much gain overkill is necessary (nt) - morricab 01:59:05 04/13/06 (7)

So, how many times must a signal - E-Stat 05:33:03 04/13/06 (6)

That's what you get for thinking... - Charles Hansen 08:24:53 04/13/06 (5)

Actually - E-Stat 09:52:19 04/13/06 (4)

Re: Actually - Charles Hansen 12:06:03 04/13/06 (3)

Details - E-Stat 12:44:36 04/13/06 (2)

OK, this makes sense - Charles Hansen 15:21:15 04/13/06 (1)

I still believe the future is simpler - E-Stat 15:32:01 04/13/06 (0)

I don't want to be TOO fussy, but the model designation is 'ACT2', :-) ... - jeffreybehr 11:27:24 04/12/06 (4)

Re: I don't want to be TOO fussy, but the model designation is 'ACT2', :-) ... - anthonyh 12:03:55 04/13/06 (3)

Mr. Fussy is back. :-) It can't be both Act 2 and ACT2. - jeffreybehr 15:22:13 04/13/06 (2)

Re: Mr. Fussy is back. :-) It can't be both Act 2 and ACT2. - anthonyh 08:14:28 04/14/06 (1)

That's what they tell me, too. In fact, Tor, the marketing director... - jeffreybehr 14:11:15 04/14/06 (0)

Thanks for your response...(nt) - mkuller 10:14:19 04/12/06 (0)

Re: I've gone back to active - morricab 01:42:37 04/11/06 (2)

Passive just before the amp. - Ozzie 17:19:08 04/11/06 (1)

Not the whole story - Charles Hansen 19:19:33 04/11/06 (0)

Great answer - Larry I 12:15:10 04/10/06 (0)

Agree! NT - chris keating 08:49:57 04/10/06 (1)

Yup (nt) - nightdoggy 11:13:23 04/10/06 (0)

Three times I have tried passive units. They each lasted less than a month. - Norm 06:39:58 04/10/06 (21)

Re: Three times I have tried passive units. They each lasted less than a month. - morricab 07:31:51 04/10/06 (20)

Re: Three times I have tried passive units. They each lasted less than a month. - clio09 16:18:21 04/10/06 (2)

Re: Three times I have tried passive units. They each lasted less than a month. - clio09 13:19:10 04/11/06 (0)

Re: Three times I have tried passive units. They each lasted less than a month. - AbeCollins 01:25:01 04/11/06 (0)

Re: Three times I have tried passive units. They each lasted less than a month. - AbeCollins 12:21:29 04/10/06 (16)

Re: Three times I have tried passive units. They each lasted less than a month. - morricab 01:33:58 04/11/06 (12)

Apples and oranges - Charles Hansen 10:09:39 04/11/06 (11)

Re: Apples and oranges - morricab 02:40:59 04/12/06 (10)

Re: Apples and oranges - Charles Hansen 07:41:18 04/12/06 (9)

Re: Apples and oranges - morricab 01:50:20 04/13/06 (8)

Re: Apples and oranges - Charles Hansen 08:31:45 04/13/06 (7)

Re: Apples and oranges - morricab 13:34:28 04/14/06 (6)

Re: Apples and oranges - Charles Hansen 14:35:34 04/14/06 (5)

Re: Apples and oranges - proth 16:16:28 04/14/06 (4)

Re: Apples and oranges - Charles Hansen 19:12:52 04/14/06 (3)

PreAmp Feature Set + - proth 11:03:26 04/15/06 (2)

Re: PreAmp Feature Set + - Charles Hansen 14:57:46 04/15/06 (1)

Thanks for taking suggestions under consideration (nt) - proth 15:51:48 04/16/06 (0)

Yep, as I said. nt - Norm 13:22:19 04/10/06 (2)

We agree to agree. ;-) - AbeCollins 13:51:24 04/10/06 (1)

45s are outstanding, but 1.56 watts is very little. - Norm 17:38:12 04/10/06 (0)

It depends... - AbeCollins 23:51:52 04/9/06 (0)

Re: Are active preamps a pointless appendage of a bygone age? - blackwax@mac.com 21:46:53 04/9/06 (0)

Don't think so..... - Marc Bratton 20:35:42 04/9/06 (0)

Passive preamps... - Audio Pharaoh 14:37:06 04/9/06 (2)

But that would mean I got lucky twice, with my system and my neighbor's. - L.D. 15:30:41 04/9/06 (1)

Re: But that would mean I got lucky twice, with my system and my neighbor's. - JANDG 18:39:28 04/9/06 (0)

Follow Ups

Passives better than poor actives yes, but lack the weight/fullness of the better actives IMO. [nt] - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 04/11/0613:25:12 04/11/06 (0)