Tortuga Audio LDR1 Passive Preamplifier

by Audiophilia on October 20, 2013 · 5 comments

in Preamplifiers

Roy Harris/ I have a friend who lives in Manhattan who frequently visits audio forum websites. He has discovered many products designed by manufacturers, who are not well known, who sell direct to the consumer, via the internet. I spoke to him recently and asked him if he were aware of any components which he considered worthy of review. He consulted his list of amps, preamps, CD players and speakers, and suggested I investigate the Tortuga Audio LDR1 passive preamp.

I called the designer, Morten Sissener, and he explained below, the basis for the development of the LDR1 preamp:

He was in the process of designing a tube preamp and became dissatisfied with the available analog volume pots, He read information about light dependent resistors (LDRs) on the internet. He applied the technology and developed LDRs to serve as a volume control.

An LDR is a combination of a photo resistor and an LED in a sealed package. Power is required to control the resistance level of an LDR. The external power supply is used solely to control brightness running through the LED. It is completely isolated from the audio signal. The signal from a source only passes through an LDR and a short length of copper wire. Sissener believes that the LDR and short length of wire do not have an audible affect upon the signal.

Tortuga Audio is the only company using a digitally controlled analog LDR. There is a microprocessor inside the preamp which controls the LDR. Tortuga Audio is one of a few which uses LDRs to control volume.

Break In

Sissener burned in the preamp for 72 hours prior to sending it to me, and I auditioned the preamp for 24 hours prior to critical evaluation. He believes that LDRs do not require a break in period. His personal experience is that the LDR1 sounds the same on day one as it does one month later. He also suggested that he has not encountered anecdotal evidence from others regarding the need for break-in.

The LDR1's rear panel. (1 input/2 outputs)

The LDR1

Listening Results

I always begin a review with the goal of testing for errors in frequency response. I use two CDs for this task. The first is Holly Cole, DON’T SMOKE IN BED, Alert Z2 81020, track 1. The song “I Can See Clearly Now”, commences with an acoustic bass solo. Immediately, I noticed a change in the quality of the bass response. What I heard reminded me of a solid state amplifier. The sound of the strings and wood exhibited greater clarity and focus. However, there was a slight loss of fullness, accompanying the increased resolution. Cole’s voice elicited sibilance to a slight extent, but it did not sound exaggerated. As I have stated in other reviews, her voice is closely miked and it is expected that some sibilance will ensue. However, I did not perceive a peak in the treble. In addition, I heard some decay, following the word “sky”. I had not noticed such decay in previous auditions, on my system, or at audio shows. Further, for the first time there was a hint of ambience retrieval from the recording studio, as one could observe space behind the singer.

The second disc I rely upon as a test of frequency response is Bela Fleck, FLIGHT OF THE COSMIC HIPPO, Warner Brothers 9 26562, track 4. I again observed greater clarity with the LDR1 in my system. The banjo and cymbal exhibited greater articulation and more natural timbre. It seemed that a subtle veil had been removed, although I was not aware of any veiling when my reference tube preamp was in my stereo system. The bass was more controlled, consistent with what I heard on the first disc. The fingering of notes was more in focus, and the sound of the vibrating wood body was more taut. This created an impression of a slightly smaller instrument, and a reduction in fullness. One could also say that any overhang, or sloppiness in the bass had been eliminated. Thus greater resolution was associated with “less meat on the bones”.

The rest of the musical selections were chosen to demonstrate the sonic effects of increased resolution.

The next selection was “Cappricio Italien”, conducted by Alexander Gibson, from a Chesky disc, CD-12. I noticed greater clarity from the trumpets and french horns, without an edge. The string section sounded smoother and less strident than previous auditions on other stereo systems, as well as in my own. There was, as well, greater separation between the trumpets and string sections. Finally, there was greater decay following a cymbal crash.

One of the criticisms of passive preamps is its treatment of dynamic contrasts. A visit to my local library provided an opportunity to test the aforementioned hypothesis. I discovered a recent recording of Chopin’s Ballades by a Polish pianist, whose name I do not know, recording on an obscure Polish label. The pianist in question is Wojciech Switak, and the label is Nurodony Instytut Fryeryka Chopina. The catalogue number is NIFCCD 026. I was impressed by the performance—a combination of poetry and technical excellence. I selected Chopin’s “Ballade in F, opus 38”, and set my Radio Shack meter at 70 DB. I was startled after several minutes, when the pianist used the loudness pedal. My Radio Shack meter registered in excess of 90 DB, for a fraction of a second. In addition to the pianist’s unique interpretation, I was able to detect breathing, obviously recorded at a low SPL.

The last selection was Britten’s “A Young Person’s Guide to the Orchestra”, conducted by the composer, LON 417 509. At the onset, the orchestra sounded like a cacophonous mess—ragged and constricted. Shortly thereafter, the brass, winds and string sections were heard individually. Each ensemble exhibited a more natural timbre, than the initial sound of the orchestra. Next, the instruments of the percussion section—tympanum, cymbal and triangle, had a brief solo. The instruments were introduced in the aforementioned order. Again, I observed additional clarity, relative to my reference tube preamp.
I could now hear the cymbal and triangle as separate entities. There was greater space between instruments. Thus, I heard each instrument, followed by a brief rest. The triangle exhibited greater treble extension and more natural timbre. I also observed that I could sense the metallic bowl of the tympanum. This was the first time I experienced such a phenomenon.

Conclusion

The LDR1 did not exert itself upon the signal, as far as I could discern. As such, it represents the least colored preamp I have ever heard in my system. It also provided greater resolution than any other preamp in my experience. After auditioning the LDR1, I thought of the dichotomy facing serious listeners, namely truth, or beauty. This preamp is truthful. An implication of this dichotomy would be a choice of richness, with some loss of resolution, or resolution with some loss of richness.

Since the LDR1 eliminates a source of distortion, the performance of a stereo system is more dependent on the recording and the other components in your system. You may prefer not to listen to certain recordings because of their flaws. Occasionally, some recordings, usually, popular or jazz, bordered on the analytical.

The benefits of increased resolution have been previously mentioned in the context of my discussion of recordings selected for this review, namely, greater sense of space, greater instrumental separation, improved ambient retrieval and the revelation of detail recorded at sound pressure levels less than that of the instruments on a recording. The main consequence of increased resolution was the absence of euphonic coloration and a slightly “leaner” presentation.

Since all stereo systems have a “sound”, it is easier to alter that “sound”, when you minimize the number of components that have a “sonic signature”, otherwise, the interaction between complementary or reinforcing colorations will make the task of attaining a sonic preference more difficult. A preamp, such as the LDR1, could help to achieve a sonic preference more efficiently.

The LDR1 is best suited for stereo systems having a balanced frequency response, where one’s goal is an increase in resolution. You can determine for yourself, whether this preamp furthers your sonic objectives, as it is available for a home trial direct from the manufacturer. If you are not satisfied, your only expense is shipping costs.

Associated Equipment

Speakers: Quad ESLs and Magnepan 1.6s
CD Player: Vincent CDS6
Transport: Vincent CDS6
DAC: PS Audio PWD
Preamp: Blair Chapman
Amps: Quicksilver and VTL Deluxe 120s
Digital Cable: High Fidelity Cables CT-1
Interconnect Cable: High Fidelity CT-1
Speaker Cable: High Fidelity CT-1 and Ear to Ear
Power Cords: Emotiva, Ear to Ear, MAC, PS Audio and Distech
Power Products: Alan Maher parallel line conditioner, PS Audio Noise Harvester, PS Audio Juice Bar, Quantum Line Filters, Balanced Audio Technology Power strip and Enacom line filters
Passive Accessories: Egg crate mattress material, Corner Tines, Echo Tunes and room tunes

Tortuga Audio LDR1 Passive Preamplifier

Manufactured by Tortuga Audio, Cape Coral, FL 33914 USA

tel: +1.312.283.4550

website
email

Price: $1,195 (includes a remote control which controls volume and channel balance)
Source: Manufacturer Loan

{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }

MARTIN APPEL 10.22.13 at 7:04 am

Sounds very interesting… rear panel seems to be limited in terms of inputs and output jacks. Could be a problem for those who have systems with 3 or more analogue sources.

MARTIN APPEL 10.22.13 at 7:55 am

Went to the website and saw the LDR6 and that has many more inputs and is not that much more expensive. That would solve that problem.

admin 10.22.13 at 7:57 am

Nice review, Roy.

The piece looks intriguing and may be the perfect compliment to a system with a just few connections.

It’s also nice to see a web based company with such a sophisticated, defined ID and navigable, effect, well-designed website.

Cheers, a

Morten Sissener 10.24.13 at 2:28 pm

As a designer and manufacturer, providing input and reading the resulting reviews of one’s own audio gear is always an interesting journey.

Whereas many reviews can be a challenge to get through and seem often to be more about the reviewer than the equipment, Roy takes a refreshingly direct approach here that while offering key observations and distinctions, steers clear of the dense thicket of hyperbole and audiophile adjectives that can often lead to “too much information coma”.

I believe Roy captured the essence of our LDR based passive preamps. Namely, the unveiled clarity, articulation and resolution together with little or no coloring. If that’s what floats your audio boat, you won’t be disappointed.

LDR Passive Preamps may not work optimally with every combination of source and amp but when the fit is good, you’re hard pressed to find a better sounding preamp regardless of price. Roy didn’t say anything like that in his review but then again he doesn’t hear all the customer feedback we get ;).

In addition to the single input LDR1 Roy reviewed we also offer a 6 input LDR6. By the end of the year or early next we’ll also be coming out with a balanced version of our LDR passive premap.

Cheers,
Morten

admin 10.24.13 at 5:07 pm

Congratulations, Morten.

And, thank you for the detailed comment.

Cheers, a

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>