CAT vs BAT vs ARC vs Lamm

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
I love my CAT Sl1 Sig preamp with rit's. IMHO CAT makes some of the best, if not the very best, tube based electronics available in today's market. How many of you have heard the CAT electronics and what are your thoughts? Lamm vs. CAT, BAT vs CAT, ARC vs. CAT, Tenor vs CAT etc.
Have you heard Ken's statement pieces like the Legend preamp and the Signature series amps?
If not, then I believe you may be in for a treat:)
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
Intersting question as a good friend of mine is running his system with CAT Signature amps with a pair of ARC 610Ts right beside those. I have the Lamm and i have heard all the others mentioned. Each one terrific in its own right. For me the buck stops here as I have my perfect amp. Nonetheless all of the others are also worthy for consideration
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
Steve

Very, very OT .. In this endeavor I would not , ever, use the term "perfect" you used on you previous Lamm amp and before that on other part of your system .. You moved toward, to you, better component so for now .. You have a great system one you should enjoy .. but ...
Now back to preamp .. I am now an SS man so ...bowing out of the discussion ... I did ike the Cat by the way ...
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
I owned a CAT SL-1 Signature with phono section. It was the version that replaced a pair of 12AU7s with 6922 tubes. Unlike Davey who said he has compared the CAT to a Counterpoint SA-5.1 and he likes the CAT better, I didn't. The CAT was put out with the kittey litter and moved on down the road to a new house. I have only heard the BAT VK-3I preamp and none of their better offerings. I found it to be a musical joke. My brother wanted to smash it when he heard it. Same as he did when I played the ARC SP-14 for him. I also owned the McIntosh C-2300 and found it to be threadbare. As I have stated on another thread on this forum, I just purchased a brand new Atma-Sphere MP-3 preamp and it should be here next week. I truly hope it will be a preamp that I love and will own for a long time. We shall see.

Mark
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
Mark, isn't it interesting how everyone has different opinions on what they hear with this gear. I think that is what makes this hobby great. Did you have a chance to roll-in some alternative tubes in the CAT where the 6922's were? Ken specifies good tubes in his gear, BUT I have found that there are several options of alternate tubes that will considerably change the preamp sound, sometimes NOT for the better. However, when you hit on the right tube, well then IMHO the preamp takes off and you can really hear what it can do. In my system the Counterpoint 5,1 was very clearly outclassed by my CAT. The Counterpoint lost detail and wasn't able to portray the sense of air or depth portrayal of the CAT. I think the 5.1 was a good preamp for its time, BUT against the better tube designs of today it seems a little lacking. My friend who owned it sold it shortly after our 'AB. He went on a replaced the 5.1 with an CAT Ultimate and has never looked back. BTW, keep us informed as to your thoughts on the MP-3.
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
Davey-I assume the 5.1 you heard/compared was a stock version? Mine isn't. The line stage and phono stage have both been upgraded/rebuilt my Mike Elliott. Mike also replaced all of the RCA jacks on my unit. As for rolling tubes in the CAT, no, I never did. I purchased the CAT from the original owner who had just retubed it with tubes from Ken Stevens. The CAT was dead-quiet and I wasn't going to muck with that. A friend of mine also owns a CAT and I saw what a hit and miss affair trying to swap in "better" tubes in the CAT can be.

I am keeping my fingers crossed on the MP-3. It is a considerable sum of money and I hope it is truly a much better sounding preamp than the Counterpoint. Nothing will make me happier if I can put my Counterpoint gear up for sale and never look back.
Mark
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
Mark, It is true that you do need to be careful with rolling in tubes into the CAT.( Like any gear that you roll tubes into) There are several respected tube vendors that are able to help with this aspect and are well versed with what works and what doesn't. The 5.1 I heard was stock, but to be frank, the difference wasn't even close. The CAT was just in a different league. I would be a little surprised if your new MP-3 doesn't trounce your 5.1. BTW, as you know, the rest of your gear has a lot to do with what you hear with the preamp. You may have to look to that as well.
 
Last edited:

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
Davey-Can you give us a description of your system? Thanks.

Mark
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
Davey-Can you give us a description of your system? Thanks.

Mark

Mark

Simple

Click on Daveys member name and then you can see his gear. Thats why I added this in the forum registration. If you readers havent listed your gear this is a great place for all to see.
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
OK I will pull the bone out of my head now. I forgot about clicking on the person and looking to see if their system is spelled out. Davey, it is interesting that you have two components in your system that I used to own-the CAT and the ARC D-70. If you subscribe to the Ethan and Tom theory, you and I can't say which preamp sounds better, we can only say which one we prefer! For me, I am not signing on to any theory that tells me I am incapable of knowing when one piece of gear is better sounding than another. But then, there are people here who think a spec sheet for a piece of gear will tell them all they need to know to make a purchasing decision. The bottom line is that you have the CAT and you love it while I sold mine. I did enjoy the D-70 except for the criminal bias scheme that I have bitched about before. The D-70 was one of their last amps to use a 6550 as a sereies regulator in the power supply. I think it was many years until ARC went back to the 6550 series regulator.

The bottom line and good news here is that you are very happy with your system. I am in the process of trying to decrease the noise floor of my system and hopefully have a more clear window to look through.

Mark
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
Mark, I think that in anyone's system the ancillary equipment and the room bare a large factor in the resulting sound. I agree with you, the D70 has a biasing scheme best left to a professional. Luckily, I have a very good tech and the amp doesn't seem to wander off bias much.
What were you running your D70 and CAT with when you owned these pieces? Did you own them at the same time? As you can see, I use the ARC as a tube alternative, along with my JR model 8 ( which is what I primarily use and is my ss reference). However, I very much like the different presentation that the tube amp gives with my SF GH's. I am really a true believer that in this hobby, synergy between pieces is of paramount importance. I listened to numerous tube amps before deciding on the D70mk2. It was superior in my system to the later model ARC amps such as the VT100Mk3 and in many ways to the Ref110. It also was superior to the BAT VK55SE and 75SE and the Aesthetix Atlas among others that I listened to. Amazingly, the only other amp that I AB'ed it against that was on the same plane was the Tenor 75; which had the same ability to portray depth and the same purity of high freq reproduction. I still maintain that if you had rolled in tubes into your CAT, that you may have kept it. Again,IMHO, it is a factor as to what other ancillary gear you were using at the time of you CAT ownership and probably also your room dynamics. BTW, I am happy with my system, BUT I sure could use a better room. That in my experience, especially where I live, is BY FAR the most expensive component you can buy.
 

muralman1

New Member
Jul 7, 2010
479
0
0
Sacramento Ca
The preamps listed here so far have been tested against the H2O Fire, and the Fire won. I heard the ARC latest, and the Pass Labs 20 bettered it. This was at a dealers.
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
Muralman, I asked around today to some of my other 'phile friends in our audio group about the H20Fire. One of our group reminded me that we actually heard this piece at one of our meetings.. couldn't remember who brought it in as it was a while back, but it didn't leave much of an impression on me or the rest of the group. Also, it apparently has been discontinued and is no longer available.
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
Tom. when you say: "I wish I could compare all these preamps and determine which one I preferred, that would be some damn good fun", well why not? That is what I was getting at when I started this thread. I'm fairly sure that many of us have some experience with these preamps/amps
and therefore can offer their opinion as to their likes and dislikes. Perhaps even these same posters can tell us what they thought of the differences between the various makes...I included tube manufacturers in my headline, but as we have seen some of us have likes for ss preamps/amps and have apparently compared those to some on the list. My current preference is obviously for the CAT.
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
Mark, don't get me wrong, I can hear differences in equipment and circuits probably about as good as most folks can. Additionally, in most cases, individual components can be considered tone controls. One of you likes the cat and one does not. No problem. All I am saying is that it is good to remember that it is your preference.

Lets see here:

we purchase an lp with who knows what final mastering is done to it and not counting over 1% distortion minimum, we place it on a turntable that has resonances, we play through a cartridge that has frequency response aberrations, our tone arm has resonances, the sound (distored another 1% or more) from our speakers is bouncing back (delayed) into our tt, your cartridge is loaded how it sounds best to us probably,

then our phono amp is full of phase shifts and distortions (and if it is a tube unit possible extra distortions from the high spl from the speakers causing the tube elements to vibrate..ahem, I mean reverb), then if we picked some poorly designed tone control cables (through out the system) we add some more frequency response aberations,

then we hit that magic pre-amp (no, we dont want a stright wire with gain, we want more bloom, blah blah) and then the amp adds its distortions and then the amp speaker interface adds its distortions and then the speaker(s) add their distortions and then the speaker/room/listener interface adds some super serious frequecny aberrations, and we say that, wait...hold it....wait for it....

pre-amp A sounds better than B


I say, I prefer the sound of A to B, in my system. I expect you just don't like to use that word, prefer, but you might re-think it.

Maybe you see the light, maybe you don't. It is just a language thing. So, wish you could understand where Ethan and Tom are coming from. Ethan has to be careful how he says things and I happen to agree with him on that sentiment.
I can dig that you prefer this over that.

I wish I could compare all these preamps and determine which one I preferred, that would be some damn good fun.
u
cheers,

Tom

So based on this, everything sounds like crap and why bother? So our systems don't sound like real music. That's news? All distortions are created equal? Let's damp the hell out our rooms and listen in an anaechoic chamber or LEDE room too. Forget that, let's just listen to headphones on an ipod.

And I guess we all should dump our turntables and tube gear and instead use digital and solid state since it's perfect. How miguided are we? Oh and by the way, the most sensitive components I've found to the problems of vibrations are solid-state amplifiers and speaker crossovers (oh yes, those caps can sing a sour note). Face it: all source material, beginning with the recording electronics and front-ends have distortion; mikes probably lose 20% of the information to start with. To my ears, those of the analog realm allow me to come closer to the sound of real music than does digital, and by a wide margin at that. Yet the best audio systems can every once in a while, allow us to suspend disbelief for a moment. That speaks mountains for our ears and brain and their ability to listen through certain distortions. OTOH, there are other distortions that are objectionable-and I'd say based on people's reaction to different components, are sensitive to different types of distortion.

Funny thing is: your statement that audiophiles are searching for colorations pertains to a small segment. Most of us try and select gear that is as close to the sound of music as we can (and I'd bet those instruments have a few distortions of their own too). There are many of us who search for gear that brings us closer to the music with lower noise floors, greater resolution, etc. I'd say there's never been a time in audio when we've had so many components and designers working to lower distortions, esp. through parts selection and circuit and power supply design.

Nor do you take into account those reviewers like David Wilson, Harry Pearson or Gordon Holt who made their own recordings and used them as references. It's rather unfortunate that very few present day audiophiles, in contrast to their brethren back in the 50s-70s, don't go out and make their own recordings playback on their systems.
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
Tom, I do agree that recreating the sound of live music in the home is a far off goal. However, I do believe that as HP IMHO correctly stated, that that goal is the 'Absolute Sound'. Some a'philes seem to believe that they have reached this goal or are very close. Personally, I think we have a very long way to go_One of the most interesting tests I like to show fellow 'philes is to ask them to play a guitar piece ( any piece) on their systems. I then take out my Taylor acoustic guitar and play them a few chords in their room. Without fail, jaw's drop and every 'phile I have done this with has realized how far we have to go; most of these hobbyists have phenomenal systems that I think most anybody would say are SOTA.
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
Tom, This thread seems to have meandered a little off topic. I am still wandering if we can get some opinions from the members as to what they think of CATvsBATvsARC vs Lamm:):D
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing