Preamp to match Tundra

tmilligan · Post by **tmilligan** » 2013-02-20 16:51

Ozzzy189 wrote:A new kikkin in an enclosure to match tundra would do me, with a few improvements where possible. There could be two versions available a la tundra, one simple single input version, and another more complete version with a number of inputs, phono stage etc and so on.

I agree. My Kikkin is great and having been using the DS direct I've learnt to use only 1 input and Songcast from my Mac for everything else. But I'd happily buy something which matched the Tundra size, had a couple more inputs and a step up in sound quality.

Rufus McDufus · Post by **Rufus McDufus** » 2013-02-20 16:51

I was think along the same lines - a no-compromise version and a more practical version. Though if the practical version were to sound as good as the no-compromises version then problem solved!

ThomasOK · Post by **ThomasOK** » 2013-02-20 20:52

I don't think there is any chance of Fredrik changing from his concentration on musical performance to make a feature-laden, under-performing product and we can all be thankful for that. So there is no question that this preamp will be optimized for the most musical performance Fredrik can put into it. Just taking the preamp circuit of the Kikkin 2 and installing it properly in a better case and with the switch mode power supply would likely increase performance at least somewhat. But that is not what I would expect from Fredrik. I believe he will use what he has learned from designing the Tundras, which took a more preamp-oriented design idea of signal preservation, and test every possibility he can think of to improve the musical performance. He knows what the performance needs to be so there is no worry there.

So the real questions come down to configuration. I am definitely on the side of those who feel lots of features and modular design capabilities would likely hurt the sound, and again this is not how Fredrik designs things. So I believe a fairly simple device is to be expected. But within that I do believe it needs more than one input to have broad appeal, as does Fredrik, so obvious research will go into the least musically intrusive switching.

I personally think that it would be best if it was an all out assault to make the best line only preamp leaving things like phono stages and headphone amps separate (although if a really good headphone amp could be incorporated with no loss to the main preamp musicality I'd be fine with that). I would like to see at least 4 and preferably 5 inputs. If there is no loss adding an extra input or two once you already have the switching I would lean toward the side of more. If they aren't causing a musical loss why not have 5 inputs, those who don't need them have no loss from them being there, those who can use them will appreciate the ability. The limitation of the inputs and outputs have sometimes caused difficulty with the KK in meeting customer needs. While on this subject, I would also like to see 2 preamp outputs per channel, and one fixed output. The fixed output is not only handy for the few people who still want to record from different sources but is necessary to drive a separate headphone amp. As these are becoming more popular it is a good idea to be able to accommodate them. The second set of preamp outputs makes integrating subwoofers easier and also allows more simple bi-amping.

As to volume control it is obviously important to many to have it available from the control point so it would be best if this could be incorporated. Since the industry is going away from RS232 and towards Ethernet this might be the better way to do it, especially if there is a performance advantage to Ethernet circuitry over RS232. If there is some configurability to the preamp (things like default volume level, adjustable input sensitivity, etc.) the Ethernet connection could make this more useable. Display? Not completely necessary to have an alpha-numeric display. I find the system in the Kikkin 2 with the varying color for different volume levels to be unique, useable and pretty cool. That type of display with some indication of the input currently selected would be good although it may need another LED to indicate Mono operation which is another feature I think is worthwhile (along with balance) although I know these two features are becoming rarer.

As for balanced inputs and outputs I think it is likely Fredrik will eschew them for the same reason he did so on the Tundras. If enough people really feel the need for a balanced input I suppose it would be OK if it did not harm the musicality of the other inputs and didn't overly boost the selling price but I feel no need for one.

So new Lejonklou Premier series preamp:

Same case size and look as Tundra
Line only unit with spectacular music reproduction
4 or 5 (my preference) inputs
2 preamp outputs
1 fixed output
Mono switching
Ethernet connection (or RS232) for control via DS control point and possibly for upgrades/configuration
Adjustable input sensitivity
A simple but easily understandable display to indicate volume and input
Possible balance control (although this might complicate the display system)
Hopefully a price near the Tundra, but that will be determined by the cost to make it
Oh, and a remote control included with it - something suitably simple but that handled all possible functions

Post by **lejonklou** » 2013-02-22 16:37

Thanks for all the suggestions and ideas! Apparently there is a lot of interest in this product.

All that I can say at the moment is: Musical performance is of course priority number one. If necessary, I am prepared to go to extremes to get what I love: The thrill of listening to fantastic songs and being overwhelmed by the performance. If a feature interferes with that, I will not include it. But if the feature doesn't affect performance, I'll consider it.

Please keep the ideas coming. I'm listening.

Freddy · Post by **Freddy** » 2013-03-22 09:22

What is the recomended preamp to a Tundra?

Music Lover · Post by **Music Lover** » 2013-03-22 11:55

Freddy wrote:What is the recomended preamp to a Tundra?

imho
Such a great amp deserves the best pre, currently it's a KK.

Ozzzy189 · Post by **Ozzzy189** » 2013-03-22 12:03

If you have a tundra, I think I'd wait. I'm sure Mr Lejonklou will make a new one in the not to distant future now the monos are released.
I wonder what it'll be called ;-)
Here we go again! Lol

Post by **lejonklou** » 2013-03-22 16:57

Using the best preamp is good advice. But Tundra 1.2 is in my opinion easier to combine with other units than previous versions were.

While Tundra 1.0 and 1.1 were optimised for a Klimax Kontrol, Tundra 1.2 sounds very good with other preamps as well. For example a Kikkin.

Freddy · Post by **Freddy** » 2013-03-24 23:14

I just got a second hand Tundra 1.2! I didn´t have the chance to listen to it in advance. I was worried that my Kikkin wouldn´t match it so well. However these worries were ungrounded, it sounds very good. I must say that the difference is quite big compared to the LK140 it replace. Kikkin-Tundra also sounds better than Kairn-Tundra, maybe not a surprise. I really like the character of the sound. It has some kind of warm natural sound. I have listen the whole weekend to different kind of music and on every album it seem to bring out the magic in the music. I´m very happy with it! I will be looking for the new Lejonklou pre-amp mostly because I lack some input lines.

mrco99 · Post by **mrco99** » 2013-11-10 13:21

Hi Fredrik,

No pressure but just being curious, could you already unveil some progressions about your upcoming multiple input preamp?
Btw, I still have a silver XLR lying dormant here....will it fit?

;-)

Marco

Post by **lejonklou** » 2013-11-10 23:12

mrco99 wrote:No pressure but just being curious, could you already unveil some progressions about your upcoming multiple input preamp?
Btw, I still have a silver XLR lying dormant here....will it fit?

Hi Marco!

High pressure here and work continues. New components arriving tomorrow.

Most likely, all connections to this preamp will be unbalanced only. It's simply been the best so far.

Post by **lejonklou** » 2013-11-30 23:47

I'm following up on some questions in the Tundra Mono thread. I wonder about your opinions on fixed volume features and number of outputs.

Does anyone want any of the following features on their preamp?
If you do, why? How will you be using it? And which is the most important?

1. A Unity Gain input. This feature means that one input on the preamp will always be played at a fixed volume, regardless of the volume control setting. When selecting any other input, the volume setting is in effect. But as soon as the input with Unity Gain is selected, the volume setting is bypassed and the level of the output signal becomes equal to the level of the input signal. Hence the name Unity Gain. On Kikkin this level is the first orange, or 80.

2. A fixed level output. This feature means that there is a specific output on the preamp on which the volume setting has no effect. It will always play the input that is selected, on Unity Gain level.

3. Dual outputs. This means there are two sets of normal outputs, which play the input that is selected on the volume that is selected.

Thanks for your input (pun intended)!

rowlandhills · Post by **rowlandhills** » 2013-12-01 00:26

For me, 1 (unity gain) is the only important one the way I use my system.

For the foreseeable future, my stereo is a part of my home cinema system. I know this is a compromise, but it's still very enjoyable. I would need the unity gain to let me link up the stereo and surround systems.

mrco99 · Post by **mrco99** » 2013-12-01 03:20

For me it would be no.2.
This is the classic line out aka tape out right?
I would use this for my dedicated headphone stage - in the future possibly a Lejonklou product too?

macrotech2 · Post by **macrotech2** » 2013-12-01 12:06

I would need four inputs, none of which would be set as unity gain. Is it possible to have a configurable input which can be switched to unity gain for those who want one? The KK allows this for all inputs.

If you had two outputs, one of which was configurable to be fixed, this would provide both 2) and 3). However, personally I only need one pair of outputs, and perhaps the configurable aspect would degrade sound quality.

matthias · Post by **matthias** » 2013-12-01 20:20

lejonklou wrote:3. Dual outputs. This means there are two sets of normal outputs, which play the input that is selected on the volume that is selected.

This is for me:
One output for the power amp or active speakers
The other output for an active subwoofer

KR

matthias

rowlandhills · Post by **rowlandhills** » 2013-12-02 00:08

Matthias - why wouldn't you just use the "line out" on a Linn or a Lejonklou power amp to feed a sub?

matthias · Post by **matthias** » 2013-12-02 07:02

rowlandhills wrote:Matthias - why wouldn't you just use the "line out" on a Linn or a Lejonklou power amp to feed a sub?

I like to have the option to feed active speakers like ATCs and a SW.

KR

matthias

rowlandhills · Post by **rowlandhills** » 2013-12-02 07:32

Ah. Missed that part in your original response. Just saw the "power amp" bit. Makes sense now. Hadn't realised ATCs don't have a "sub out"

Nisseman · Post by **Nisseman** » 2013-12-04 07:39

If possible, as suggested, a way to control volume from a linn DS (in the controlpoint).

macrotech2 · Post by **macrotech2** » 2013-12-04 09:45

+1, but this would mean extra circuitry?

matthias · Post by **matthias** » 2013-12-04 11:43

Nisseman wrote:If possible, as suggested, a way to control volume from a linn DS (in the controlpoint).

IMO, sound quality and value for money should have priority.

KR

matthias

Rufus McDufus · Post by **Rufus McDufus** » 2013-12-04 11:50

Certainly agree sound quality should be the first priority!

It would be useful to control volume via a control point but I can imagine the extra circuitry required to do this could be fairly considerable, unless it's easily done with off-the-shelf components? Linn use two different methods of achieving this don't they? - RS232, and ethernet on the newer products such as Akurate Kontrol. RS232 sucks in my opinion but is probably simpler to integrate in than ethernet/TCP/IP capability.

Having said that, every time I've used an amp with an unlinked volume control (on a remote) I've ended up finding it preferable & more convenient than the control point volume control.

rowlandhills · Post by **rowlandhills** » 2013-12-04 12:02

For me, the ideal approach would be an optional addon to handle the volume control, either through Ethernet or RS232.

Make it something which can be bought for an extra payment, even if it slightly compromises sound quality.

Music Lover · Post by **Music Lover** » 2013-12-04 13:09

2 inputs and no need for fix level output or unity gain.
2 outputs is nice for those running an active system so they can connect one/many subs/head phone amp.

Please avoid Volume control by RS232 or other external systems. Likely to reduce quality as it does on KK