[jenneth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FallenAngel /img/forum/go_quote.gif What you really DON'T want to do is add a passive volume control, after a POT is a Lo-Z signal, that's susceptible to a lot of nasty things like interference.

I thought low impedance is inherently less susceptible to electromagnetic interference and RFI problems than high impedance? Perhaps I'm mistaken. The reason why I suggested the OP to consider a passive volume control is because an acquaintance of mine has a passive preamp in his system, and he seems happy with it.

Does the design/quality of the passive preamp/vol come into play (ie. balance vs unbalance, etc.)? Or are they just inherently prone to interferences?

 

[FallenAngel]

By design, you generally want to have keep wiring after a pot as short as possible.

 

[selkin]

how about this litle thing
of course you can use the inputs as outputs and the one output as an input for the DAC
that's it problem solved. it cost £13
not hi-fi quality but very far from bad

 

[samspotting]

nvm

 

[nyjets28]

if using a splitter, does the quality of the splitter matter? i ask because i've read how important the quality of interconnects are and i'm just wondering if this would be similar.

 

[aCuria]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nyjets28 /img/forum/go_quote.gif if using a splitter, does the quality of the splitter matter? i ask because i've read how important the quality of interconnects are and i'm just wondering if this would be similar.

Passive Splitters degrade the quality of the signal allot. Its probably better to swap cables when needed or get a dac that does what you want