⌈ KRAKOW SONIC SOCIETY (KSS) is an informal group of music lovers, audiophiles, and friends who meet to learn something new about audio products, recordings, music, etc. The idea for KSS was born in 2005, although its roots go back several years. Below you will find a report from its 152nd. meeting. ⌋

I OFTEN FEEL that audiophiles treat the topic of linear preamplifiers in much the same way as they treat comparisons between transistor and tube devices, digital and analog sources, and, more recently, the clash between streaming services Tidal and Qobuz – as a matter of faith. The point is that these and other divisions in audio resemble religious feuds, sometimes even battles. It's as if it's about something more than sound: emotions, belonging, even identity.

The same applies to preamplifiers. However, this topic has a slightly different dynamic than those I mentioned above, to which one could add proponents of balanced and unbalanced connections, single-driver and multi-driver speakers, high-efficiency and classic speakers, or even decoupled and mass-loaded turntables. In the case of a preamplifier, it is a matter of either something is there or it is not: either we use a separate preamplifier in the system, or we eliminate it and use the volume control in the source, most often a digital-to-analog converter, or possibly an audio file player.

⸜ Truly two of a kind... A small gift for Tomek signed by Robert Szklarz, in whose shop I started the Audioszołek meetings some twenty years ago, which were published in Audio magazine, and on the left, Rysiek B., one of the two participants of those meetings who are still members of KSS.

The problem is quite serious, because it is both audiophile and economic matter. Let's start with the former. ‘Audiophile’ because when we plug another device into the audio signal path, we change the signal. In theory, the more electronics in the path, the easier it is to distort the information. The ideal is the so-called “wire with gain.” This is a vivid way of describing minimalism in design, which is unattainable in reality, but catchy. That is, it sounds good and, as a mental shortcut, is easy to accept, replacing real knowledge with fragmentary knowledge.

However, real life shows that successive stages of amplification, buffering, etc. are usually necessary and eliminating them is costly in terms of sound quality. And yet, in perfectionist audio, the preamplifier is often viewed not as part of the system, but as an intruder. Therefore, whenever possible, people try to eliminate it. However, I think that it is not so much about the sound as it is about money. This would be the second reason, the ‘economic’ one. A good preamplifier is expensive. You need to buy a good AC power cable and interconnects. Finally, you need to find a place to put it. All of this costs money.

So what is the verdict on preamplifiers – necessary (“Yes”) or unnecessary (“No”)? At the 152nd. meeting of the Krakow Sonic Society, we will certainly not answer all the questions, but we will try to at least ask some of them, and some of the doubts may even find a sufficiently good explanation. At least in the top audio edition. Our old friend, a long-time member of the KSS, GERHARD HIRT, will help us with this.

⸜ Mandatory signatures with best wishes on the disc for Tomek

The owner of Ayon Audio is one of the most sensible people I know in the industry. He is not guided by prejudice, but by pragmatism. He has his preferences, but he does not impose them, leaving the choice to his customers – as in the case of the preamplifier. His digital sources, almost from the very beginning, have been equipped with adjustable outputs. This is, as he says, a “special” tube circuit with no output buffers, only gain circuits. They are so good that many of his customers connect power amplifiers directly with them.

But he also offers excellent preamplifiers, which I have been using myself for over a dozen years. He brought his latest product to Krakow, the Spheris Evo Quadruple preamplifier. It is the only tube design of its kind in the world, designed to operate with power amplifiers in bi-amping setup. In short, it is two stereo preamplifiers in one box, powered by two separate power supplies, plus additional gain control at the input. The Dynaudio speakers at Tomek's place feature single inputs, so we only used half of the device, which in this mode works almost like the classic Spheris Evo; review → HERE.

It was one of two preamplifiers that evening. The other was Accuphase's top-of-the-line model, the C-3900; review → HERE. Both devices are of the same high class, but are different designs – the Ayon is a tube device with a tube power supply, while the Accuphase is a fully solid-state preamplifier. They were connected to a system that normally uses the Ayon Audio Kronos DAC with adjustable output, and were compared to it.

»«

▲ A few simple words…

GERHARD HIRT
Owner and designer

⸜ Gerhard Hirt at the 152nd. KSS meeting

FIRST OF ALL, thank you very much for coming. I am very happy to see all these smiling faces again. It is also a great pleasure for me to be with you at the meeting of the Krakow Sonic Society, because the work you have been doing for so long is of great importance to the hi-fi market. Not only for the hi-fi market, but also for music lovers, it is an important signpost.

As you know, we have a very effective distributor in Krakow, Robert, who does a great job and has made our brand very strong here. As you know, I also have a special relationship with Wojtek, whom I met before Robert. I believe that Wojtek is one of the five best audio journalists in the world, and I know pretty much all of them, most of whom I have known for a very long time. This is an incredible thing for Polish audio and a huge help. (...)

The preamplifier you see here is the first tube preamplifier of its kind in the world, and it is making its world debut in Krakow. To better understand what I am talking about, let's go back about twenty years. Some of you may remember that we were one of the pioneers in designing tube output players. I think it was our second CD player, probably the CD-1S model, in which we used volume control. We call it a “buffer-less output stage.”

We introduced this adjustment and a direct connection to the amplifier and, believe me, already 20 years ago or so, in the CD-1S model, it worked perfectly. The result was that in the case of a regular preamplifiers, they were usually outperformed by our circuit. Of course, in such a case, without output buffers, we have to make sure that the parameters are matched to the input parameters of the power amplifier. The cable should not be too long, and the capacitance and inductance should be balanced. If all this works, you can invest maybe $10,000 in a preamplifier to improve it, otherwise there is no chance.

When we started 20 years ago, we optimized and optimized, and one of our best starting points without a buffer can be found in the Kronos DAC and the CD-35 and CD-35 Mk II players (in the High Fidelity Edition). This is currently the top version of this design. On the other hand, we also offer preamplifiers such as the Polaris and Spheris. All of them are buffered preamplifiers, and believe me, it's not easy to outperform them with any regular preamplifier. This means that you have to come up with a truly unique design to create a preamplifier that will surpass them.

During my travels around the world over the past ten years, I have met many customers, distributors, and dealers. They had large systems, large speakers, expensive speakers, and a lot of money to spend. They have almost everything: preamplifiers, sources, power amplifiers, large speakers, well-designed room acoustics, top-of-the-line cables, and yet they still want to invest more money. What is the next step? A second power amplifier. And this is where the disaster begins. When you connect a second power amplifier, it doesn't matter whether it's to a solid-state or tube preamplifier, you're making a mistake.

Usually, a customer buys a second stereo amp or a second pair of monoblocks. They invest a lot of money, and the first thing they hear is more power. So everything sounds a little more dynamic. But in reality, the soundstage is no longer three-dimensional, everything is reduced. However, we don't recognize this immediately because the second power amplifier brings a slightly different sound. We relieve the first power amplifier, the speaker can deliver more dynamics, and we think it's an ‘improvement’. But this is not the case, because the second power amplifier immediately loads the output stage and the electrical parameters change immediately, leading to a deterioration in signal transfer.

I wondered how we could solve this issue. One day, I came up with the idea of completely separating each channel to control the outputs separately. In a balanced preamplifier, we have a ‘minus’ and ‘plus’ signal in each channel. We separated them, and at first it seemed like it would be easy: we use four completely separate gain sections in the preamplifier and we're done. The problem, however, was volume control. In the Spheris model, we use volume control that does not use resistors, potentiometers, chips, or anything else.

The signal in the basic version of the preamplifier is as follows: left ‘minus’, left ‘plus’, right ‘minus’ and right ‘plus’, which means four transformers regulating the volume. We would say that since we have two preamplifiers in one housing, we simply need eight transformers. However, as you can see, in the Quadruple Spheris version, we have as many as twelve.

As you can see, volume control is very complicated because we have to take into account interference, various electrical load parameters, etc. This means that the key issue is not that we have C3m tubes in the circuit. It's about the volume control system. And believe me, such a design, for example with a resistor ladder, not to mention a potentiometer, immediately causes the dynamics to be lost and the sound to fade.

Spheris Quadruple is the first tube preamplifier in the world in which we have solved this problem. We can control, without any loss, from input to output, two stereo, or four separate (mono – ed.) power amplifiers. The preamplifier is made to order, and we produce only five units per year, with a minimum lead time of one year, and sometimes even two years.

When I first presented this idea to my favorite technician many years ago, and this technician is really very, very good, he told me that I was crazy, that I always have crazy ideas, and that I should forget about it. Because I knew him, I realized that I had to convince him somehow, and then he would get passionate about it. So I said let's go have a glass of wine at our local bar. We drank all night, this is a true story, we sat there drinking and drinking and drinking. And I know that when my engineer drinks, there is a chance that he'll think about my idea.

At the first light he said, “You know you're crazy, right?” He also said that it's not as simple as just quadrupling the volume control system and the output level and everything will be fine. On paper, it's simple, especially with a resistive regulator. But in high-end audio, it's not. Then he added that he had to think about it, and I knew there was a hope for my idea. I thought I had managed to convince him. And once he started, he had to see it through to the end, he's that kind of guy. We built many prototypes, many combinations, and it took us a really long time because we always had some problems – but in the end we succeeded.

And then, the next night, with a lot of wine, we kept pursuing the idea. And I can finally say that we built a machine where everything is ready. The boards are ready, everything is soldered. It took him three months to assemble this unit because he did everything himself. I'm not talking about engineering, I'm just talking about assembly. It's really amazing – he drills the holes in the chassis himself to realize his idea. He really drills every hole by hand and threads it. He doesn't even use a CNC machine. I think there are about 400 holes and threads in the preamp. • GH

»«

TWO PREAMPLIFIERS WERE COMPARED – A TUBE AND A TRANSISTOR ONE. On the one hand, the former, the Ayon Audio Spheris Evo Quadruple, had the advantage because the system included the Ayon Audio Kronos DAC – and synergy is sacred. The Spheris would therefore replace the Kronos's adjustable output, remaining in the same world of ‘Ayon Audio’ sound. On the other hand, however, the same system also features the Accuphase P-7300 transistor power amplifier. Adding a preamplifier from this company, especially a top-of-the-line model (in every respect), would promote synergy in this part of the audio path and the sound ‘by Accuphase’. Therefore, we decided that both preamplifiers had an equal chance.

⸜ Tomek, our host, in kneeling position, known from medieval iconography...

As you can see, the meeting was special for many reasons. First of all, because of the topic, which is rarely researched. Secondly, because our guest was Gerhard Hirt, who brought with him a one-of-a-kind device and unique knowledge. Thirdly, we had another guest – Roman Nowak, owner and head of NAUTILUS WEJHEROWO ATELIER, who visited us for the first time. And there was a fourth reason to celebrate: it was the 30th. KSS meeting at this location, i.e. at Tomek Folta's place, for whom it was a good opportunity to officially present the logo of his new company → AUDIO-CONSULTING TOMASZ FOLTA.

▌ SOUND

HOW WE LISTENED • The listening session took place at Tomek Folta's using his system, where the signal source is the AURENDER N20 file transport ˻PL˺ digitally connected to the Kronos Signature digital-to-analog converter. At its output, there is a volume control with a tube circuit without an output buffer, which Gerhard mentioned earlier. The balanced signal from it runs via interconnects to the Accuphase P-7300 power amplifier.

⸜ The listening system consists of Dynaudio speakers, an Accuphase power amplifier, an Ayon Audio DAC, and an Aurender file transport; on the rack in front of the preamplifier is another Accuphase preamplifier, and on the platforms in front of it is the Ayon Audio monster.

The volume control in Kronos can be disabled, in which case it functions as a classic DAC with a fixed output level. After disabling it, we connected the Ayon and Accuphase, listening to two tracks with each. With the preamplifiers in the signal path, the signal was first transmitted via a Siltech Triple Crown cable and then using the 2 meters long Acoustic Revive Triple-C Absolute speaker cable to the power amplifier. Unfortunately, we did not have a Siltech cable of the same length at our disposal during the listening session, which caused some problems, as discussed in the third part of the review. The Kronos and preamplifiers were powered by Siltech Master Crown cables; a second such cable powered the power strip.

We used Tidal and Qobuz as sources of audio files.

» RECORDINGS USED FOR THE TEST

˻ I ˺ Accuphase C-3950 vs Ayon Audio Spheris Evo Quadruple

⸜ FRANK SINATRA, Witchcraft (Restored Edition '25), Mouton Recordings/Tidal, FLAC 24/96 ⸜ 2025.
⸜ BERNARD LAVILLIERS, Rafales, Barclay/Qobuz, FLAC 16/44,1 ⸜ 2008.
⸜ CHRISTINA PLUHAR, L'ARPEGIATTA, Polo Margariteño (Polo), Warner Music Group/Tidal, FLAC 16/44,1 ⸜ 2012.

˻ II ˺ Ayon Audio Kronos Signature vs Ayon Audio Spheris Evo Quadruple

⸜ THE DEAD SOUTH, In Hell I'll Be In Good Company, Qobuz, FLAC 16/44,1
⸜ STEPPENWOLF, Born To Be Wild, Geffen Records/Tidal, FLAC 24/192 ⸜ 1968/2024.
⸜ AMERICA, A Horse With No Name, Warner Records/Tidal, FLAC 16/44,1 ⸜ 1971/1987.

˻ I ˺ Accuphase vs Ayon Audio

TOMEK FOLTA , TF Audio Consulting, KSS • Listening to the first track, FRANK SINATRA’S, I had the impression that perhaps Accuphase had some advantages, that it was more resolving, etc. But when Bernard Lavilliers' song played, the dynamics, drive, and space that the Spheris delivered were so fantastic that I knew that the acoustic problems in this room were not due to acoustic adaptation, but to the control of the power amplifier's output.

With Spheris, we could turn up the volume to the max, while Accuphase required turning it down slightly to maintain tonal balance. With the Ayon, there was no rumble, and the bass was fantastic, well-separated and very well controlled. When we played the third track, Polo Margariteño (Polo), I also had my doubts for a moment, and the Accuphase seemed more interesting to me for a while. However, in the end, the Spheris generated such a fantastic, pleasant, pastel sound that it also proved to be the winner of the comparison for me in this track.

ROMAN NOWAK, Nautilus Wejherowo Atelier • For me, the favorite in every track, without a doubt, was Ayon Spheris. This presentation is closer to my heart. Sinatra's vocals were captivating, more real, more authentic, and the difference was – I'm not exaggerating – overwhelming. Thanks to the wonderful timbre of his voice, I was transported back to the era in which the recording was made.

The same was true of Bernard Lavilliers' recording. I listen to it often because it is spectacular. The snare drum attack at the beginning, its suspension in space, power, precision, and clarity were definitely in Spheris' favor. The same goes for bass control. In the recording by CHRISTINA PLUHAR and L'ARPEGIATTA, it's just colors, colors, colors... They are crucial for enjoyment, and this is where I found the biggest difference, again in favor of the Austrian preamplifier. What I love about Spheris is the colors and how it is able to convey them. It is a display of magic and experience encapsulated in this beautiful device.

MARCIN, KSS • I won't be original and say that Spheris sounded much, much better. But I noticed the biggest differences on the first track, Sinatra’s. The way the wind instruments sounded on Spheris, you would think that the system with just the D/A Converter was from a different league. I'm exaggerating, but that's how I perceived it. The vocals sounded better with the Ayon, but it was the trumpets that showed its crushing advantage.

WICIU, KSS • Sinatra's first bars came as a shock to me. I was very disappointed with the Accuphase version, because Wojtek said it was an exceptionally good recording. I didn't like it at all. But the second time, with Spheres, I heard Sinatra as we know him. The other two tracks were similar – melodiousness, musicality, controlled bass. The soundstage widened and deepened with it. Today, here and now, I have no doubt that Spheris played better.

RYSIEK B., KSS • I was disappointed with the first playback with the Japanese preamplifier. With the preamp from Ayon, I was really impressed because it sounded better than at my place. And usually, I like what I have at home the most :) I think that Ayon works perfectly with this company's DAC, while Accuphase has clear problems with this combination. I don't think it's the fault of the preamp itself, but rather how it was implemented here.

This is a good example of how some things work well together, while others do not, regardless of price. The difference is too great for this to be a problem with the Japanese preamplifier.

JANUSZ, KSS • It seems to me that Ayon added a lot of warmth and velvety sound, softening it, thanks to which Sinatra gained warmth that was missing with Accuphase. It was similar in the next two tracks, but with the caveat that Tomek made – the Accuphase with the preamps offers better detail, a more accurate sound image, which I found lacking a bit with the Ayon. But then I decided that in the long run, the Ayon is more enjoyable, you can immerse yourself in those colors. The space was also better and you could feel the difference. It gets the job done...

JULIAN, Soyaton, KSS • For me, the choice is also obvious – Ayon played in a completely different league. One of you said earlier that after the first few bars, you had the impression that the Accuphase was broken, because the Ayon sounded so much better. I agree, the difference was so big that there was nothing to talk about.

Ayon brings color and depth to the soundstage. With Accuphase, the sound was shallow, like a wall of sound. With Ayon, bass control appeared. With the Japanese preamplifier, I thought I was sitting in the wrong spot again, that I had sat down in a place where the bass is boomy. It turned out that I hadn't – with Ayon, it disappeared completely and was replaced by great bass control, great differentiation and dynamics. I didn't like the third recording, Polo Margariteño (Polo), but that's because, in my opinion, it's a weak quality file, somehow internally empty. I have this album on CD and it's much better. But apart from that, Ayon rules.

ROBERT SZKLARZ, Nautilus • I have been distributing Accuphase for twenty years, it is an important brand for me, but I agree with what has been said, especially by Rysiek. There is no synergy here, and the C-3950 preamplifier doesn’t stand a chance in this setup. I know this device from many configurations and I have never heard an Accuphase sound so bad. It just doesn't fit here. Even though the power amplifier is from the same company. And Spheris fits perfectly into this setup.

From experience, I know that Accuphase ‘gets along well’ with other devices from this company, and when added into other systems, it may not necessarily fit well. This is a very interesting comparison for me and a lesson for people not to just buy the best products and use them. They need to be properly combined – and that is real knowledge. Accuphase should be used in a system with other devices from this company, and that's it. Ayon seems much more versatile – after all, Wojtek uses a Soulution power amplifier. This is a warning to readers to listen first and foremost, and not to mix things up senselessly based solely on price.

«●»

˻ II ˺ DAC vs Ayon Audio

ROMAN • I wanted to speak first because I feel comfortable saying that although both presentations were cool, it was a listening session with a clear advantage of Spheris. In fact, in every track it showed what resolution is, but it did so in a fantastic way, so natural and unobtrusive. It drove the Dynaudio speakers in a much more pleasant way. I liked this presentation much more because the system controlled them better with the Ayon preamp.

But the biggest differences, in my opinion, came after we stopped using the preamplifier. Having the Spheris Evolution device to compare it to, once it was disconnected from the system, we were simply left with flat sound. I'm exaggerating, of course, I think the volume control on Ayon sources is fantastic. But using a preamplifier of this class defines the sound and clearly shows the advantages, the indisputable advantages of using a preamplifier of this class.

In addition to richer colors, there is an outstanding holography. This is something I would give my right arm for. It is the foundation of good sound. And considering the special arrangement of Tomek's speakers, which allows for a very deep insight into the sound stage, we have this pleasure, which we lose when we enter direct control, i.e. with the source’s volume control. In the case of Spheris, it is definitely a richer, more evocative sound, right?

And there is one more thing I would like to mention – with Spheres, I feel calm. Simply put, when I listen to the system with this preamplifier, I hear music flowing naturally, windows opening, and I feel that the sound is more detached from the speakers. I think I'll leave it at that, but I'd like to say one more thing: in my experience, the higher the class of the power amplifier, and certainly monoblocks, the better they reveal the qualities of a preamplifier of the Spheris Evo class.

I assume that the designer's idea, Gerhard's idea, was for Spheris to crown the work and play in the most outstanding systems, so that's where you should listen to it. In my opinion, its role there simply cannot be overestimated. It is an absolutely essential component. And that's it. Thank you very much.

MARCIN • I have no choice but to agree with Roman. Spheris contributes a lot to the overall sound. I completely agree. The device improves dynamics, tones, and colors. The songs we listened to came to life with it.

But, importantly, it's not that when we played without a preamp it sounded bad. Because it sounded very good. But there is something clearly noticeable here, namely that the worse a track is recorded, in my opinion, and the more difficult it is to reproduce, the more Spheris shows what it can do with it. If the songs were nicely recorded and nicely composed, the preamp had less work to do, because it sounded very nice even without it. That's all from me.

WOJCIECH PACUŁA • So, did you like it?

MARCIN • I liked both versions, although there is a definite difference in favor of Spheris and the fact that it fixes everything. Even good sound can be improved. And once you've listened to music with it, it doesn't make much sense to listen without it – ‘why drink the same beer when you can taste that the fizz has gone?’, to quote a classic :) In the first track we played, there was much more space. The instruments were better distributed and more noticeable. Similarly in the last song, in which played the bandoneon, without the preamp, it was just as Roman said, even if he was exaggerating: flat, flat screen, and it was as if you couldn't hear the layers.

RYSIEK B. • So now it is time for me to stir things up, as usual. I disagree with everything you said, except for one thing – that the Spheres offer purity, which is definitely an advantage. Tonal scaling is also an advantage. Bass control is an advantage of the preamplifier. But unlike Marcin, I believe that the Ayon preamp is suitable for high-end recordings, for good recordings, well-recorded albums.

Others laugh…

That's exactly why I said I would stir things up – it's clear to me that Spheris is suitable for high-quality sound. However, when it comes to vocals, the system with the preamplifier literally ‘screamed’. I really didn't enjoy listening to the vocals. And you won't silence me, this is a place of free speech. So I'll repeat: at times it screamed, that's how I felt. And even though I think the musicality is better with the preamplifier I still enjoyed listening more without the Spheris.

I believe that all the recordings we listened to were of low quality, and that is what made me enjoy listening to them without a preamplifier in the system so much. I could just listen to this for hours without any fatigue, thank you very much.

JANUSZ • To disagree with what Rysiu said, i.e. to say something against what he said, i.e. he denied what was cool and wasn’t anymore. But what was it I wanted to talk about...? :)

Getting back to the point, I have a problem with the first track, which sounded much better with the DAC alone. The vocals were very good, with nice textures. The instruments were tangible and cool. However, with the second track, when we switched from the preamplifier to the DAC, everything clearly ‘degraded’ and there was no longer the momentum, no dynamics that Spheris offers.

JULEK • My observations are closest to what Janusz said. Indeed, in the first track, THE DEAD SOUTH, In Hell I'll Be In Good Company, I liked the sound better when Kronos was connected directly to the power amplifier. This is because there was too much going on with Spheris, too many sounds. It's a raw sound that doesn't need any extra boost.

With the remaining three tracks, there was no doubt that they sounded much better with the preamplifier, that the Spheris added some magic to the sound. It was about the warmth, musicality, dynamics, 3D – simply put, every aspect was better.

ROMAN • I would like to draw attention to one technical aspect – in comparisons of this type, it is crucial to set the volume identically. When we played the same tracks from the DAC after disconnecting the Spheris, the sound was louder, which may have worked in its favor. In our studio, if we want to compare two different components head-to-head, we use a decibel meter. A decibel meter is essential because the average volume on both playbacks must be identical.

With Kronos in the signal’s track, the sound was louder, which is why the first track might have sounded better with it, without the preamplifier. But the resolution was clearly better with Spheris, it conveyed textures perfectly, and the amount of information was much greater with it.

ROBERT • In the first track, you were right in the sense that it is difficult to compare sound quality on average quality recordings. However, all subsequent tracks clearly sounded better with Spheris. The pleasure of listening to music was higher, and that's what matters most, right? Of course, bass control with Spheris was much better. This is an indisputable improvement, a big plus. The depth of the soundstage, the colors, all these aspects were more interesting. But one thing we missed was the pleasure of listening to music, which I mentioned earlier. Spheris was a lot of fun.

TOMEK • I'm glad that the song by The Dead Souls from their debut album attracted so much attention, even though this genre of music is completely not my cup of tea, as everyone probably guessed. Nevertheless, two or three months ago, a good friend from high school sent me this album and I liked it so much that it got me hooked and I've been listening to it every day in my car, which is something I never do.

Therefore, I would like to categorically disagree with the previous speaker that audiophiles, audio industry customers, or music lovers, whatever we call them, should build their systems around well-recorded tracks. In my opinion, they should build them around their systems and for their music.

I am glad that in this clash between Goliath and David, Kronos stood the ground so well, because everything you said is true, and the drive that Spheris brings to the recording, the way it creates space, the way it generates three-dimensional stereo sound, all of this is above average. However, everyone, even at the high end of the market, has to take into account that this is another expense of tens of thousands of euros.

Of course, when we build a ‘money no object’ system that costs millions, the final price is irrelevant, and in such a system, you can't do without Spheris. Because, ultimately, Ayon Spheris is the big winner. In this type of comparison, there could be no other outcome. But I think that Kronos with a direct connection to the power amplifier also defended itself very well, considering the price difference.

▌ Summary

MEETING WITH PREAMPLIFIERS by Ayon and Accuphase revealed several interesting things. Firstly, synergy is the key to success, and the simple question ‘with or without a preamplifier’ must be accompanied by additional information such as ‘in what system’, ‘with what preamplifier’ or, equally important, ‘compared to what adjustable output’.

After the main listening session, Robert Szklarz asked for a minor change, and we listened to the Accuphase preamplifier once again, but this time we replaced the Acoustic Revive cable with a second Siltech Triple Crown interconnect. It turned out that the device sounded much, much better. But still not at the same level as the Spheris. And yet it is an excellent device, I have tested it in my system and it performed perfectly. It just didn't work in this particular setup.

However, something else may prove even more important – the quality of the source’s adjustable output. What Gerhard has achieved in the CD-35 (I and II) and Kronos is unprecedented. As he said in a long and candid statement during the break, 95% of his customers do not use preamplifiers in their Ayon systems. Yes, plugging in a preamp such as the Polaris or Spheris does improve the sound, but the leap in quality is not always worth the money.

However, the results will be different, very different, with audio file/CD/SACD players or D/A Converters that feature classic or digital volume control. In such cases, adding a preamplifier – but only one that will work in synergy with the system – should be number one on your shopping list. After all, even in this comparison, with the Kronos' adjustable output, the Spheris blew everyone away with its colors, dynamics, space, and bass control.

So, there is no single answer to the question: “Preamp – yes or no?” It all depends on the system, and adding a preamp will not always improve the sound. And if it does, the cost of this operation will be disproportionate to the gain. However, if everything is fine with the system and we want to get the best possible sound, a preamp will give us something that no other component in the audio chain can offer. ●

▲ SETUP WE USED

⸜ Audio File player: AURENDER N20
⸜ DAC/preamplifier: AYON AUDIO Kronos Signature
⸜ Power amplifier: ACCUPHASE P-7300; test → HERE ˻PL˺
⸜ Loudspeakers: DYNAUDIO Confidence 50; test → HERE
⸜ Cables:
• speaker cables: SILTECH Triple Crown
• analog interconnects: SILTECH Triple Crown, ACOUSTIC REVIVE Triple-C Absolute (2 m)
• digital interconnect AES/EBU: SILTECH Classic Legend 880D (1,5 m)
⸜ Power strip AC: BASE Power Base High-End 6 Limited Edition