Why do I need a pre-amp?

Allan Milne posted:

 

Eloise

- Can't see the point in putting in an ADC because then we would have
phono stage -> ADC -> digital pre -> DAC -> ...
-just more colouring components in the chain;
- and that is the point about the V1 and Hugo TT - why do we need 2 pre-amps.

 

 

 

If you have a DAC that has its own preamp, and is very, very good direct into a power amp, you have a choice if you want to use an analog source:

i) insert a preamp with between the DAC and power amp, at the risk of degraded sound on the digital sourced music because of the extra electronics.

ii) insert an ADC between the analog source and the DAC, at the risk of degrading the analog sourced music because of the extra electronics and conversion processes

iii) have a preamp in alongside the DAC, and swap which is connected to the power amp when you want to change between digital and analog sources.

Out of i) and ii), which is better depends on which out of digital and analog sources is the more important or the primary quality source for you. And of course there may be cost differences between ADC and preamp. The acceptability of iii) may depend on the frequency of wanting to change sources

Just renember that using a dedicated preamp with a DAC that includes a preamp is NOT adding another link in the audio chain.

Consider that DACs like the V1 and Hugo have line level and pre outs. If you use either with a dedicated preamp you are just swapping their internal analogue preamp stage for another. There is no reason to suppose this further degrades the audio chain unless the dedicated external preamp is of lesser quality than the built in one on the DAC (which also has to share an enclosure with noisy digital circuits).

I would hope that the analogue circuits in most Naim preamps could outperform the pre section on a V1. 

naim is a pioneer in high end digital hifi and this has left them in a strong position.

a new generation of dacs such as v1, hugo, tt, dave, and others has opened the door to the option of connecting your dac directly to a power amp, such as nap100, or active/powered speakers. a new generation of mainstream active power speakers is also emerging, for example atc scm19a. for me these technologies offer a fundamental shift in hifi that naim would do well to accomodate in their new products - power amps that work well with both naim and non-naim dacs, naim powered focal speakers, dacs that compete in sq with hugo and dave. the times they are a changing. the tradation route is still relevant, particulary for non-digital sources, but the new route needs to be accomodated.

But HM, the Naim preamp is part of the Naim poweramp.. It's carefully designed to interface correctly from an impedance, load and frequency point of view. Now we are told the Naim DAC v1, the N172 and N272 have been  designed as Naim preamps.. Then great these considerations will have been factored into the designs by Naim. They know thier circuit designs after all.

however it's unlikely a third party preamp whether built into a DAC or not will be optimum for a Naim poweramp... it may be if lucky.. but I suspects it will be very hit and miss in terms of performance, probably even more so than unsupported third part power supplies.

As we have heard from Richard and others the main Naim power amps  are designed to have a Naim NAC front end of some type.

feeling_zen posted:

Just renember that using a dedicated preamp with a DAC that includes a preamp is NOT adding another link in the audio chain.

Consider that DACs like the V1 and Hugo have line level and pre outs. If you use either with a dedicated preamp you are just swapping their internal analogue preamp stage for another. There is no reason to suppose this further degrades the audio chain unless the dedicated external preamp is of lesser quality than the built in one on the DAC (which also has to share an enclosure with noisy digital circuits).

I would hope that the analogue circuits in most Naim preamps could outperform the pre section on a V1. 

As far as I can ascertain the Hugo and HugoTT "line level" outputs use the same output circuitry as when feeding a power amp direct, the selector simply presetting the level to be that normally found on other digital equipment. So putting through a preamp does add more circuitry.

Given that, as far as received wisdom indicates, the output of the Hugo range Chord DACs is such thatbthe signal is unaffected by power amps with normal impedance ranges, so any  difference in sonic character is likely to be due to the effect of the preamp,if one is used, whether that is unintentional due to the extra circuitry, or intentional as in where the preamp introduces deliberate sound shaping  (of course this is not saying that is wrong, as although not fidelity to the signal the latter is what some people may desire).

These Chord DACs are all limited to a bandwidth of 50-60Hz to prevent ultra high frequencies saturating the amp or causing instability etc, important for most power amps not just Naim.

Hi Simon,

If the premise is correct that the optimal performance of a Naim power amp is when a Naim pre is connected then this ends the story ...

... the way to go for optimal SQ is a stand-alone DAC with no built-in pre connected to a Naim pre.

This DAC should be cheaper than an equivalent quality DAC with a pre (ha ha);

Issue solved - well in my simple view of the universe anyway

Allan Milne posted:

 

If the premise is correct that the optimal performance of a Naim power amp is when a Naim pre is connected then this ends the story ...

 

Bingo!

Innocent Bystander posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Just renember that using a dedicated preamp with a DAC that includes a preamp is NOT adding another link in the audio chain.

Consider that DACs like the V1 and Hugo have line level and pre outs. If you use either with a dedicated preamp you are just swapping their internal analogue preamp stage for another. There is no reason to suppose this further degrades the audio chain unless the dedicated external preamp is of lesser quality than the built in one on the DAC (which also has to share an enclosure with noisy digital circuits).

I would hope that the analogue circuits in most Naim preamps could outperform the pre section on a V1. 

As far as I can ascertain the Hugo and HugoTT "line level" outputs use the same output circuitry as when feeding a power amp direct, the selector simply presetting the level to be that normally found on other digital equipment. So putting through a preamp does add more circuitry.

Given that, as far as received wisdom indicates, the output of the Hugo range Chord DACs is such thatbthe signal is unaffected by power amps with normal impedance ranges, so any  difference in sonic character is likely to be due to the effect of the preamp,if one is used, whether that is unintentional due to the extra circuitry, or intentional as in where the preamp introduces deliberate sound shaping  (of course this is not saying that is wrong, as although not fidelity to the signal the latter is what some people may desire).

These Chord DACs are all limited to a bandwidth of 50-60Hz to prevent ultra high frequencies saturating the amp or causing instability etc, important for most power amps not just Naim.

I think we've just found a new potential Linn customer.

To back this up there are countless examples of folk trying to match NAPs with 3rd party pre amps - often valves - it normally ends in tears.  

Regards,

Lindsay

Allan Milne posted:

 .

This DAC should be cheaper than an equivalent quality DAC with a pre (ha ha);

 

It's called nDAC, but it's higher quality and more expensive....

It is very good though, veeery good indeed.

feeling_zen posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Just renember that using a dedicated preamp with a DAC that includes a preamp is NOT adding another link in the audio chain.

Consider that DACs like the V1 and Hugo have line level and pre outs. If you use either with a dedicated preamp you are just swapping their internal analogue preamp stage for another. There is no reason to suppose this further degrades the audio chain unless the dedicated external preamp is of lesser quality than the built in one on the DAC (which also has to share an enclosure with noisy digital circuits).

I would hope that the analogue circuits in most Naim preamps could outperform the pre section on a V1. 

As far as I can ascertain the Hugo and HugoTT "line level" outputs use the same output circuitry as when feeding a power amp direct, the selector simply presetting the level to be that normally found on other digital equipment. So putting through a preamp does add more circuitry.

Given that, as far as received wisdom indicates, the output of the Hugo range Chord DACs is such thatbthe signal is unaffected by power amps with normal impedance ranges, so any  difference in sonic character is likely to be due to the effect of the preamp,if one is used, whether that is unintentional due to the extra circuitry, or intentional as in where the preamp introduces deliberate sound shaping  (of course this is not saying that is wrong, as although not fidelity to the signal the latter is what some people may desire).

These Chord DACs are all limited to a bandwidth of 50-60Hz to prevent ultra high frequencies saturating the amp or causing instability etc, important for most power amps not just Naim.

I think we've just found a new potential Linn customer.

???? Not sure what Linn's got to do with marrying a good DAC to amplification?

i should have mentioned the n172 and n272 both of which can be directly connected to a power amp (naim or otherwise) or active speakers so naim know where the market is going. i would have considered the n272 myself if i did not have to spend another £000s on an xps power supply to get the best out of it.

Richard Dane posted:

Allan Milne posted:

 

If the premise is correct that the optimal performance of a Naim power amp is when a Naim pre is connected then this ends the story ...

 

Bingo!

couldnt agree more as things currently stand with naim. question is in todays digital world and technology is this the best solution for best sound quality? i started like the op considering upgrade options with naim and ended up with something completely different, a very simple system of dac into active speakers.

Adam Zielinski posted:

Allan Milne posted:

 .

This DAC should be cheaper than an equivalent quality DAC with a pre (ha ha);

 

It's called nDAC, but it's higher quality and more expensive....

It is very good though, veeery good indeed.

Not sure that I've seen many (or any) direct comparisons of sound quality of nDAC or V1 vs Hugo or HugoTT 

interesting that from A Dac with a built-in pre we are now considering a pre with a built-in streamer/Dac and speakers with built-in amplification ... why don't we just get one box to rule them All ... would that be a SuperNait, Unity etc

The point here is getting the best SQ for whatever budget we have and the above boxes will certainly do the trick at some budget point but I have reservations sometimes about manufacturers dabbling in areas where they are inexperienced and also putting limitations on the user's ability to do his/her own thing. Not to mention the confusion that this semi-integration is now causing.

Perhaps its the price point of these semi-integrated boxes (V1, Hugo, N272, etc) that is muddying the waters and that the idea of seperates for each function is now at the next price point up ... but wait a minute ... at this price point we are still considering separate pre/power amps to be the norm ... so where is the logic in integrating the other stuff. My personal opinion is that the complexity of the digital side confuses both manufacturers and users so providing integration gives a clearer pitcture for both. 

Different users have different criteria and minimising box count and simplifying operation at a particular price point while not sactificing SQ too much is certainly a valid aim.

However what about others (like me) who, for the same price point, want the best SQ without compromise; i.e. the best pre/power amp, the best DAC, the best streamer, etc!

it seems that choice at the, what we might call "Mid", price point is being compromised by the introduction of these semi-integrated components;

not just for availability but also comparison - e.g. what do you compare a DAC V1 to, a  separate DAC and pre, but how do you differentiate bewtween the different functions within the V1; even worse for the N272 with its 3 functions of pre and streamer and DAC.

It may be that one function of these components is great but that others could be bettered but the separate functionality is not exposed to us as separate component boxes so we can never really tell.

Oh wel ... I don't suppose life is ever easy but sometimes the lure of the one ring pulls me to a place where I cannot upgrade so don't have to worry about it but then I'd never really know how great recorded music can be

Sorry for the (almost) rant but its Sunday morning and I'm filling in time before the F1 starts ... oh that would be now then ...

Allan

Spa...Hamilton back of the grid - Should be good Allan.

G

I can understand your predicament. Yes, it is complicated. With the advancement in digital technology, there are now more options than ever for the user to choose from. In the end, we pick one out of the many available options or choices.

Innocent Bystander posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Just renember that using a dedicated preamp with a DAC that includes a preamp is NOT adding another link in the audio chain.

Consider that DACs like the V1 and Hugo have line level and pre outs. If you use either with a dedicated preamp you are just swapping their internal analogue preamp stage for another. There is no reason to suppose this further degrades the audio chain unless the dedicated external preamp is of lesser quality than the built in one on the DAC (which also has to share an enclosure with noisy digital circuits).

I would hope that the analogue circuits in most Naim preamps could outperform the pre section on a V1. 

As far as I can ascertain the Hugo and HugoTT "line level" outputs use the same output circuitry as when feeding a power amp direct, the selector simply presetting the level to be that normally found on other digital equipment. So putting through a preamp does add more circuitry.

Given that, as far as received wisdom indicates, the output of the Hugo range Chord DACs is such thatbthe signal is unaffected by power amps with normal impedance ranges, so any  difference in sonic character is likely to be due to the effect of the preamp,if one is used, whether that is unintentional due to the extra circuitry, or intentional as in where the preamp introduces deliberate sound shaping  (of course this is not saying that is wrong, as although not fidelity to the signal the latter is what some people may desire).

These Chord DACs are all limited to a bandwidth of 50-60Hz to prevent ultra high frequencies saturating the amp or causing instability etc, important for most power amps not just Naim.

I think we've just found a new potential Linn customer.

???? Not sure what Linn's got to do with marrying a good DAC to amplification?

It's just a light hearted jibe mixed with genuine ackowledgement that this view of the role of the pre-amp has some support from well respected manufacturers. Linn ditched dedicated preamps a while back since they also do not see the need for it in the audio chain. After all, a true preamp (not a control amp) does in fact exist inside every digital source to bring the output from a DAC up to a level acceptable for most "pre" (control) amps. You can imagine this as a sort of phono stage if it makes it easier (the comparison is close enough even if how they work differs). Linn really did not see a market or need for adding another batch of circuits so dropped this product line entirely. Although I think if one thing is comes from that is that if you are going to merge a pre with a digital source then the preamp section better be given as much thought or actual priority over the DAC for it to work right since that is invariable where the magic is most easily broken.

Since most of this circuitry exists already with a predefined output level, we're still not really adding more to the audio chain with a dedicted pre than we are when adding a pre onto the analogue output of a CD player(for example). Of course the big difference is that with most digital sources, a control pre is absolutely necessary since the output is fixed. I fully understand that in the case of a TT or V1 no such requirements exists. In the case of the TT where the line level may be a fixed point on a variable output (I don't know but wouldn't make any assumptions) I think you've made your point. If you feel that it sounds clearer direct into a 250DR than going via anything between a 202 to a 552, far be it from anyone here to say it is wrong.

That said, many have tested, compared, and blogged on the forum and reportedly come back to the Naim preamp. I think your logic is sound. I just think that if combining these, I'd want a Preamp with an onboard DAC more than a DAC with an onboard preamp - if you understand my distinction.

Halloween Man posted:

Richard Dane posted:

Bingo

couldnt agree more as things currently stand with naim. question is in todays digital world and technology is this the best solution for best sound quality? i started like the op considering upgrade options with naim and ended up with something completely different, a very simple system of dac into active speakers.

My kind of post, I knew this would be a good one from he start.

 Simon posted:

In short if you don't appreciate the

(sonic benefits)

and connection flexibility of the NAC you probably don't need it (pre amp). 

Correct, but once again HM, has put the argument into proper context.

In today's digital World! The OP's dilemma, which I thought was best SQ!

HM posted:

yes, the hugo has its own internal preamp\volume\voltage control. it cannot be bypassed. connecting it to a second preamp will degrade transparancy, even if it was the best preamp ever made.

Wow, a strong Statement, which addresses the OP's dilemma, as it pertains to SQ!

Now , beit, Naim, Linn, or Dan D'agostino, I would imagine that optimal performance occurs when their electronics are combined.

Bingo!

Amp & Pre-Amp.

The Straight Wire Theory!

Interesting, are we done?

Allante93!

Wow!

You beat me to it, Allan!

Hot post, same key word INTERESTING!

GraemeH posted:

Spa...Hamilton back of the grid - Should be good Allan.

G

So much for that - A scrappy start so far.

G

feeling_zen posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Just renember that using a dedicated preamp with a DAC that includes a preamp is NOT adding another link in the audio chain.

Consider that DACs like the V1 and Hugo have line level and pre outs. If you use either with a dedicated preamp you are just swapping their internal analogue preamp stage for another. There is no reason to suppose this further degrades the audio chain unless the dedicated external preamp is of lesser quality than the built in one on the DAC (which also has to share an enclosure with noisy digital circuits).

I would hope that the analogue circuits in most Naim preamps could outperform the pre section on a V1. 

As far as I can ascertain the Hugo and HugoTT "line level" outputs use the same output circuitry as when feeding a power amp direct, the selector simply presetting the level to be that normally found on other digital equipment. So putting through a preamp does add more circuitry.

Given that, as far as received wisdom indicates, the output of the Hugo range Chord DACs is such thatbthe signal is unaffected by power amps with normal impedance ranges, so any  difference in sonic character is likely to be due to the effect of the preamp,if one is used, whether that is unintentional due to the extra circuitry, or intentional as in where the preamp introduces deliberate sound shaping  (of course this is not saying that is wrong, as although not fidelity to the signal the latter is what some people may desire).

These Chord DACs are all limited to a bandwidth of 50-60Hz to prevent ultra high frequencies saturating the amp or causing instability etc, important for most power amps not just Naim.

I think we've just found a new potential Linn customer.

???? Not sure what Linn's got to do with marrying a good DAC to amplification?

It's just a light hearted jibe mixed with genuine ackowledgement that this view of the role of the pre-amp has some support from well respected manufacturers. Linn ditched dedicated preamps a while back since they also do not see the need for it in the audio chain. After all, a true preamp (not a control amp) does in fact exist inside every digital source to bring the output from a DAC up to a level acceptable for most "pre" (control) amps. You can imagine this as a sort of phono stage if it makes it easier (the comparison is close enough even if how they work differs). Linn really did not see a market or need for adding another batch of circuits so dropped this product line entirely. Although I think if one thing is comes from that is that if you are going to merge a pre with a digital source then the preamp section better be given as much thought or actual priority over the DAC for it to work right since that is invariable where the magic is most easily broken.

Since most of this circuitry exists already with a predefined output level, we're still not really adding more to the audio chain with a dedicted pre than we are when adding a pre onto the analogue output of a CD player(for example). Of course the big difference is that with most digital sources, a control pre is absolutely necessary since the output is fixed. I fully understand that in the case of a TT or V1 no such requirements exists. In the case of the TT where the line level may be a fixed point on a variable output (I don't know but wouldn't make any assumptions) I think you've made your point. If you feel that it sounds clearer direct into a 250DR than going via anything between a 202 to a 552, far be it from anyone here to say it is wrong.

That said, many have tested, compared, and blogged on the forum and reportedly come back to the Naim preamp. I think your logic is sound. I just think that if combining these, I'd want a Preamp with an onboard DAC more than a DAC with an onboard preamp - if you understand my distinction.

At the end of the day it all depends on the sound you like. Most who have actually heard Hugo and/or its senior brethren seem to decide that is best, and then want the best way to play it. And some then decide better through a Naim preamp, presumably for the Naim sound shaping to emphasise PRaT, while others decide direct to power amp or active speakers. You need to hear to decide what is right for you!

Allan Milne posted:

 

interesting that from A Dac with a built-in pre we are now considering a pre with a built-in streamer/Dac and speakers with built-in amplification ... why don't we just get one box to rule them All ... would that be a SuperNait, Unity etc

 

The point here is getting the best SQ for whatever budget we have and the above boxes will certainly do the trick at some budget point but I have reservations sometimes about manufacturers dabbling in areas where they are inexperienced and also putting limitations on the user's ability to do his/her own thing. Not to mention the confusion that this semi-integration is now causing.

 

Perhaps its the price point of these semi-integrated boxes (V1, Hugo, N272, etc) that is muddying the waters and that the idea of seperates for each function is now at the next price point up ... but wait a minute ... at this price point we are still considering separate pre/power amps to be the norm ... so where is the logic in integrating the other stuff. My personal opinion is that the complexity of the digital side confuses both manufacturers and users so providing integration gives a clearer pitcture for both. 

 

Different users have different criteria and minimising box count and simplifying operation at a particular price point while not sactificing SQ too much is certainly a valid aim.

 

However what about others (like me) who, for the same price point, want the best SQ without compromise; i.e. the best pre/power amp, the best DAC, the best streamer, etc!

it seems that choice at the, what we might call "Mid", price point is being compromised by the introduction of these semi-integrated components;

not just for availability but also comparison - e.g. what do you compare a DAC V1 to, a  separate DAC and pre, but how do you differentiate bewtween the different functions within the V1; even worse for the N272 with its 3 functions of pre and streamer and DAC.

It may be that one function of these components is great but that others could be bettered but the separate functionality is not exposed to us as separate component boxes so we can never really tell.

 

Oh wel ... I don't suppose life is ever easy but sometimes the lure of the one ring pulls me to a place where I cannot upgrade so don't have to worry about it but then I'd never really know how great recorded music can be

 

Sorry for the (almost) rant but its Sunday morning and I'm filling in time before the F1 starts ... oh that would be now then ...

Allan

Re what to compare a V1 with, my first suggestion  is to enlist a a dealer that sells both Chord and Naim (obvious, I guess).

I would compare a Naim DAC with the V1 (or Hugo) into your NAC 202 and let your ears decide whether there is somehung better and/or different.  Both fed by the Unitiserve's  SPDIF output. Also, presumably is your V1's pre bypassed with your NAC 202 controlling the volume? 

A further step could be to use the USB input of the V1 (or Hugo) and place a USB to SPDIF converter  with the NDAC.  This means using a computer in place of the Unitiserve.

Doing atleast one of the steps above would enable you to appreciate what a dedicated DAC vs combined DAC n Pre does.  

You could repeat one of the steps above with a 282 in place of the 202.  This should enable you to hear the difference a pre makes in your set up.

Alternatively, just continue to enjoy your current set up.

Jude

Posted by the Innocent Bystander:

""At the end of the day it all depends on the sound you like. Most who have actually heard Hugo and/or its senior brethren seem to decide that is best, and then want the best way to play it. And some then decide better through a Naim preamp, presumably for the Naim sound shaping to emphasise PRaT, while others decide direct to power amp or active speakers. You need to hear to decide what is right for you!""

Sounds like an harmonious ending, to an interesting post.

And as Innocent, has pointed out, choice is the optimum word.

Paraphrasing an Engineer, and well Respected Member of the Forum:

No longer, just the Analog TT, the Digital CD, or Digital Streaming, but choice, depending on Music and Mood!

And the Nac, is an excellent Navigator betwixt, these Sources.

And as HM, as pointed out, in this digital World, the Hugo/250DR isn't a bad start.

Who knows, that start could lead up to:

LP 12/Cdx2/Hugo/250DR, all navigated by an 

252DR, Fraimed up!

Out!

Allante93!

I'm a bit confused - I'm not aware of Naim pre-amps having any sort of "sound shaping to emphasise PRaT".  What is this about?  Pitch, rhythm and timing can certainly be undermined by a pre-amp. Pre-amps may seem simple but they are really tough to get right and many brands get this very wrong in my experience - pitch integrity is often the first thing out the window.  Pitch integrity is something audio designers like Naim try ever so hard to preserve - it's either there or its isn't, I'm not sure how it can be emphasised here.