Which is fine but, surely, even a passive pre would impose something of itself onto the sound? By doing it passively, you don’t plug it into the wall and you don’t listen to the pre-amp. They impose their own sound upon your listening chain. This, says Billington, is why active pre-amps are flawed. This is a ridiculous way of turning volume up or down because you end up listening to the transistor or valve components and the power supply components.” So, you’re taking the output of your CD player and you’re using it to modulate the regulated power supply of the pre-amp. You then plug your source into the pre, then use the signal that’s coming out of the source which modulates the stored voltage, via a series of transistors or valves and turns that DC back into either higher voltage version of the CD output or a lower version. That’s then stored, possibly into capacitors. It pumps out, what, 2V? You plug in your active pre-amp which sucks in 240V from the wall, turns it into 24V or so, that’s then rectified, turning into around 18V DC. The active pre puts its own signature on the sound. So why passive at all? What’s the issue with a powered pre-amp? Why bother with a passive design? According to Billington, because, “…you end up listening to the pre-amp rather than the source. The pre-amp is there to allow you to select your source and adjust the volume.” So you either have to use an integrated pre-amp or a pre-amp followed by a power amp. “Source equipment, CD player or tuner and so on, doesn’t normally come with a volume control, many phono stages don’t or even a Sky digibox. “Not really, no,” said Billington, shooting down that particular theory. I wondered if the whole idea of a passive pre was to enable you to effectively get rid of the pre and virtually, as it where, plug your source into the power amp? Waiting for a signal from a source which it then passes down the line to your power amp. It’s also for anyone looking for a (relative) bargain.īeing a passive pre-amp, the Classic has no power supply, no power switch, no power cable and no plug. It’s a sort of kick-in-the-pants-type review for anyone looking to buy a pre-amp or thinking of upgrading. This review is more of an awareness piece, I suppose. It sounds incredible doesn’t it? Take away the VAT and you’re down to £1,700 and that’s not very profitable for a small business which also has to include costs for travelling to shows and renting space, etc.” But, as Billington himself said, “It’s very difficult to earn a living selling things at £2,040. Not because it’s past its best – far from it. This model was released in 2003 and so, you might say, “Paul, your a tad late with this particular review, ain’t you ol’son?” Reason is that I was about to review Music First’s latest version of its much more expensive Baby Reference when I heard that the Classic is destined for retirement. Such transformers occupy the chassis of his Classic passive pre-amp. Maybe that’s why his folks have been making top quality transformers since 1963 and why Jonathan Billington has been making superb examples since 1978 because, to make transformers that reach into the level of genius, this is the sort of mind you need. He would then take the top right, the next day, followed by the bottom left the day after that. Which one do you take now? One in the middle? Top right, perhaps? Music First Audio owner, Jonathan Billington, would choose the bottom right. OK, next day, you’re back, hungry for breakfast again and it’s another boiled egg for you. Which one? Let’s say you took the upper left, for the sake of argument. You can see six, recently laid eggs, right? If you are going to make a boiled egg, which egg would you take first? Yes, I know it’s an odd question but bear with me on this. Imagine you’ve got half a dozen eggs in a box. Music First Audio is a specialist in transformer production, Paul Rigby reviews the Classic passive pre-amp which is full of ‘em
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |