Mjj Posted August 16, 2020 Share Posted August 16, 2020 I have an option with my Pre-amp (jumpers inside) to reduce the input level and hence have the volume POT operating say between 12 and 2 o’clock instead of 8-10am position. Considering that at max the POT should not be impacting the signal much at all has anyone found that organising listening levels at the mid or upper range of the Volume POT better for Sound quality at comparable volumes?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussievintage Posted August 16, 2020 Share Posted August 16, 2020 Usually, the best thing to do is keep the signal level as high as you can. as early in the signal chain, as you can. This improves the noise floor, because any introduced noise, after the source, is amplified less. So no, don't reduce the signal input level. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mjj Posted August 17, 2020 Author Share Posted August 17, 2020 That was my thinking, initially, then I discovered my preamp POT has some channel imbalance at low listening volume (I have sleeping toddlers). The channel imbalance goes away after 8pm on the dial. Looking online some have suggested that using 80% of the resistance on offer from the POT by using it at the low end of the dial may not be good for the sound- Better in the mid to high region. I’m not using MC/MM source but a streamer (analog in) and is never played past 10am on the dial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussievintage Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 6 minutes ago, Mjj said: Looking online some have suggested that using 80% of the resistance on offer from the POT by using it at the low end of the dial may not be good for the sound- Better in the mid to high region. I see no logical reason why. Except for channel imbalance at the point on the pot you are using, there's no reason to reduce the input using switched resistors then just have to amplify it all over again. Replace the pot with a better one? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Rutter Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 (edited) Better still. Stepped attenuator. But you have to build your own. The few "commercial" ones I have tried are rubbish. Edited August 17, 2020 by Colin Rutter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mjj Posted August 17, 2020 Author Share Posted August 17, 2020 Thanks for your prompt reply and comments. I’ll investigate the replacement POT idea, once I’ve defined How much it Really bothers me. Also I’ might give the jumper a go before spending any money. I had wondered if you were just putting a block of resistance in one place that enables the POT to not need add as much resistance at its end. I’ll check the schematics, I can certainly see a problem if the input voltages are dropped but if the Added jumper resistance is “close” to the POT Electrically. Hope my non-expert comments make sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbz Posted August 18, 2020 Share Posted August 18, 2020 I don't see any of this making any significant difference BUT strong support for having a go and see what turns up. In most amps, the pot is just an attenuator, it passes a variable amount of the input line signal so if you attenuate with pot or pot+jumpers neither here no there. Suggest check the tracking of the volume pot by measuring resistance between input and wiper (amp powered off/unplugged) and compare with other channel. Stepped attenuators are for those who are "OCD" about channel inbalance. If quality parts are used then they are a better option than the humble pot, but at a cost... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts