In Reply to: Re: one more question... posted by placete@aol.com on July 26, 2002 at 08:18:37:
hi Guy,i am out of town and just saw your excellent explaination. it is a treat getting the straight answers from the designer of the gear. thanks for taking the time.
i have some questions;
1. are you saying that in every case your active preamp will sound better than your passive?
2. or if the sources have sufficient output, the amplifier has sufficient gain, and the interconnect between the RVC and the amp is sufficiently short (and the impedence issues are correct)......can the passive be equal or better than the active?
i am using 3 sources that all have plenty of gain into a switchbox and then using one 23 foot xlr interconnect into the RVC and then a 1 meter xlr into my Tenor amps which have 40k input impedence. i have plenty of gain with all sources.
i don't have any of the output specs with me to share at this time. but last year when we discussed my set-up i recall that my sources had fairly low output impedences and that you felt it would be optimized with the passive RVC.
my switchbox is a custom design which is "suppose" to allow the source impedence to pass unaltered (according to it's builder).
in any case, my "arrangement" is a good deal better to my ears than any active device i have yet tried. i get the identical performance from the Placette RVC as i get from the Tenor amps used in the integrated mode. i prefer this performance to any active gain stage used with the Tenor amps in my or any other Tenor system i have heard.
if there is a better solution for my situation i would like to consider it.
best regards
mikel
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- thanks, a few questions. - mikel 07/28/0210:28:10 07/28/02 (1)
- Re: thanks, a few questions. - placete@aol.com 11:10:14 07/29/02 (0)