Anyone seriously audition CAT gear and decide against it? Anyone switch from CAT?

caesar

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2010
4,290
767
1,698
About 2-3 years ago, when Steve was still living in Danville, CA, he took me by Mike Grellman's house who had both the CAT reference amps and the ARC 610T's in his listening room. For those of you who don't know Mike,, he is as discerning a listener as they come. His rig was a Rockport Sirius with an all Aesthetic tube front end and large Rockport speakers (not sure of the model). He had the luxury of being able to use either amp as both of them were there long term. He was kind enough to switch to the ARC for me so I could hear the comparison. After a few hours of listening, the differences were obvious. But in the end, there was no wrong or right, just personal preference. Mike preferred the CAT because he liked the "density" of tone color. I had a slight preference for the ARC because of what I thought was slightly better spatial resolution with a more expansive sound stage. The point here is that this just proves yet again, the old adage about stereo systems as well as ice cream as taught to me by my old mentor Paul Heath: "There's chocolate, vanilla, and strawberry. Yer pays yer money and yer takes yer choice".


I agree with you that it's all about taste. Personally, it makes no difference to me what gear people like, what they like to eat, what colors they prefer, or what positions they prefer during "intimate relations". Watching the Alexia vs. S5 thread get shut down is such a shame, as most members here are very intelligent, yet arguing about their preferences or that their brand is superior without any proof is almost medieval.

Yet the CAT vs. Audio Research is interesting to look at from a marketing perspective. As soon as Audio Research releases a product, they quickly send it off to Valin, whom any other excellent tube manufacturer avoid like the plague, Kessler,the American reviewer writing for British magazines, who always reviews Wilson and Martin Logan products telling us they are the greatest on earth, and a few others influencers who go on to praise it endlessly. However, when CAT releases a new product, it's ignored. Furthermore, there are almost no places to audition CAT.

As a student of human behavior, I wonder how many of those Audio Research devotees would stick with the brand if other excellent tube brands were easy to audition and got a fraction of the hype Audio Research does. If CAT had a reviewer or 2 even with a fraction of Fremer's reputation have it in their system, there would be a dent in ARC's sales.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: andromedaaudio

puroagave

Member Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
1,345
45
970
..Yet the CAT vs. Audio Research is interesting to look at from a marketing perspective. As soon as Audio Research releases a product, they quickly send it off to Valin, whom any other excellent tube manufacturer avoid like the plague, Kessler,the American reviewer writing for British magazines, who always reviews Wilson and Martin Logan products telling us they are the greatest on earth, and a few others influencers who go on to praise it endlessly. However, when CAT releases a new product, it's ignored. Furthermore, there are almost no places to audition CAT...

I think you're giving reviewers too much credit as "influencers" and you have a hard-on for this Valin guy he's mentioned in at least 2/3rds of you posts:rolleyes:

twenty years ago CAT was on everyone's lips when talking about the 'best' preamp you could buy (or it was on your short list). they were always low key and advertised sporadically. ARC on the other hand always seem to take two steps back when the 'replacement' model came out, and how prolific they were, just count the number of preamp models ARC came out with over the same twenty year span. And that's part of CATs problem, their pre is essentially the same unit they've made all those years ago without even a face lift...and just maybe, there are few CAT dealers because they're not dealer friendly:eek:

I've heard plenty of CAT preamps but never owned one, I've always got my eye open for a deal on the latest spec SL-1.
 

caesar

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2010
4,290
767
1,698
I think you're giving reviewers too much credit as "influencers" and you have a hard-on for this Valin guy he's mentioned in at least 2/3rds of you posts:rolleyes:

Having a background in social psychology and the science of influence, I would tend to disagree. Influencers are very important from my perspective. Most audiophiles have no confidence in their taste and need reassurance. Just a simple example of 2 metal speaker companies: say YG got all the hype instead of Magico, and say the publicity were reversed, you could probably make the case that YG would be the "magico" of today. But we are getting off topic here...
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,434
13,467
2,710
London
Hi Caesar, this does not have to do with influence of reviewers alone. What AR does well, is that it makes the market for its product liquid. I might get a chance to audition CAT, I know the UK distributor well, but I will never buy it. This is hifi, I need products I can trade in and out of - not only because that's part of the hifi hobby, but because I might need money from hifi in other parts of life. The UK distributor for Wilsons, Logans, and AR is the same, and what he has done is create a brilliant liquid market for his products. Other brands from other distributors are not as liquid. I know many people, myself included, who will take a punt on these products and buy in the used market because we know we can get rid of it easily if it does not work out - unfortunately, not so with CAT. The reviews, distribution, and service all help in creating that liquid market

I agree with you that it's all about taste. Personally, it makes no difference to me what gear people like, what they like to eat, what colors they prefer, or what positions they prefer during "intimate relations". Watching the Alexia vs. S5 thread get shut down is such a shame, as most members here are very intelligent, yet arguing about their preferences or that their brand is superior without any proof is almost medieval.

Yet the CAT vs. Audio Research is interesting to look at from a marketing perspective. As soon as Audio Research releases a product, they quickly send it off to Valin, whom any other excellent tube manufacturer avoid like the plague, Kessler,the American reviewer writing for British magazines, who always reviews Wilson and Martin Logan products telling us they are the greatest on earth, and a few others influencers who go on to praise it endlessly. However, when CAT releases a new product, it's ignored. Furthermore, there are almost no places to audition CAT.

As a student of human behavior, I wonder how many of those Audio Research devotees would stick with the brand if other excellent tube brands were easy to audition and got a fraction of the hype Audio Research does. If CAT had a reviewer or 2 even with a fraction of Fremer's reputation have it in their system, there would be a dent in ARC's sales.
 

caesar

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2010
4,290
767
1,698
Hi Caesar, this does not have to do with influence of reviewers alone. What AR does well, is that it makes the market for its product liquid. I might get a chance to audition CAT, I know the UK distributor well, but I will never buy it. This is hifi, I need products I can trade in and out of - not only because that's part of the hifi hobby, but because I might need money from hifi in other parts of life. The UK distributor for Wilsons, Logans, and AR is the same, and what he has done is create a brilliant liquid market for his products. Other brands from other distributors are not as liquid. I know many people, myself included, who will take a punt on these products and buy in the used market because we know we can get rid of it easily if it does not work out - unfortunately, not so with CAT. The reviews, distribution, and service all help in creating that liquid market

Great point. And great marketing.

Porsche in the US works the same way. A new model gets hyped as the "greatest ever", even if not entirely true for all features. People buy them, drive them for 5-10K miles, and get a new one. Those of us who can't afford a new one get the used ones, etc. If we get engaged, we come back and buy a new one next time....In Europe, however, it seems people hang on to their Porsches 8-10 years.
 

puroagave

Member Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
1,345
45
970
Having a background in social psychology and the science of influence, I would tend to disagree. Influencers are very important from my perspective. Most audiophiles have no confidence in their taste and need reassurance. Just a simple example of 2 metal speaker companies: say YG got all the hype instead of Magico, and say the publicity were reversed, you could probably make the case that YG would be the "magico" of today. But we are getting off topic here...

by your reckoning then, CAT's following would be like the tail wagging the dog. I recall dealers recommending the SL-1 that weren't even CAT dealers. then there was the dreaded wait list further enhancing their mystique. the positive buzz in audiophile circles passed word of mouth well before the magazines got a hold of it. theres a similar corollary that exists today with message boards and e-zines getting word out of something special before the Valin's of the world get a chance to review them.
 

caesar

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2010
4,290
767
1,698
by your reckoning then, CAT's following would be like the tail wagging the dog. I recall dealers recommending the SL-1 that weren't even CAT dealers. then there was the dreaded wait list further enhancing their mystique. the positive buzz in audiophile circles passed word of mouth well before the magazines got a hold of it. theres a similar corollary that exists today with message boards and e-zines getting word out of something special before the Valin's of the world get a chance to review them.

Puro, sorry I got busy and forgot about thread, but I do find this very interesting...

Yes, I actually had a dealer admit to me that if he had a 10 year old CAT preamp, he wouldn't bother upgrading to any of the dozen or so electronics brands he was selling... And I also agree with you that word of mouth is more important than a single "authority figure" recommending a product....

Sure, social networks and boards light up when there is a cool new product. But this buzz is usually an enhancement of the existing buzz, not the spark. Real buzz comes around from performing well at shows, comments by a large number of fans, and reviews by a large number of “audio experts”.

Unfortunately, CAT has no buzz today. You, me, and a small handful of others, who are not owners, are the only ones talking about it, like it is some kind of nostalgia. Most other audiophiles, however, have not heard CAT in a number of years. And unfortunately, they have no interest in the brand.

However, if you start a thread about Audio Research, people will flock to your thread. That’s because Audio Research is a blockbuster. Whether their product is good or not, they get Valin and a few other reviewers to write it up. Those reviewers happen to like the ARC product but have not heard the competition in their system, so they think Audio Research is great (, or at least good enough. After all, if they write a good review, they can get to hold on to it and get the next model. And who would be stupid enough to write a bad review of an ARC product anyways?)

Based on the initial buzz, audiophiles can go to a large number of dealers and hear it. Many will buy it and start yapping about it to their friends and online…And it’s just human nature to yap about a popular product than a more obscure one, which may just absolute kick the popular product’s ass in every way possible (except maybe soundstaging ?). But sadly, many folks on the forums only talk about the popular products because they get extra enjoyment of discussing shared experiences of products they own or are familiar with. So many ARC fans are ARC fans only because others are ARC fans. The technical term for this phenomena is “social proof”, but such is human nature.

Also, research shows that consumers of obscure products appreciate those products less than owners of popular products. The more obscure the product, the less likely it is to be appreciated. In effect, what results is a natural monopoly of popular, yet not necessarily “best” products. People’s tastes tend to converge on a select few blockbuster products rather than be dispersed across the assortment of available offerings.

Ever see CAT throw a huge release party at a show? Or hand off their products to a bunch of respected reviewers? No. And they have almost no dealers. So, unfortunately no one is talking about CAT…. Kind of sad.
 

Mcbrion

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2013
91
14
313
Connecticut
I had the first 3 CATS that came out after HP proclaimed them the "IT" preamp back in 1988. A second iteration came out in 1990 and I got that. Then I got a Modulus (a bit on the dark side, and, in retrospect, not quite in the CAT's league).
Then moved away from audio, came back to it and got a First Sound Deluxe Mk I and upgraded to MK II. Fantastic preamp, with dual mono power supplies. Then sold it and got a CAT MK III. Great again, but then my Antique Sound Labs had problems and I sold the CAT.
The CAT is a superlative preamp, and at this level, you get variations on sound, although I'm sure when you start paying 15-30k for preamps, you will find something better. The question is, how much does all this 'better' resemble actual live instruments? The original CATS had tremendous detail, but were a bit 'pastel' as Harry pointed out as soon as he did the Jadis reviews, back in the january 1991 issues of TAS and that the Jadis 'restored' the color the CAT left out.
I have a CJ now, but it's not a CAT, as good as it is. I hear ARC at my local dealers occasionally, but their system sounds nothing like real music, given how expensive their components are. I'd say that my system, limitations and all, 'moves' in a more lifelike the way it does in (again, my two reference halls, The Metropolitan Opera and Carnegie Hall). So, it's not always the component.
I know Ken Stevens slightly. I've met him and he remembers me from back when I was aligned with TAS. I think he's got a great customer base as it is, and doesn't need to advertise. He's not making 14 different products. When you make a lot of products, you're trying to please as many people as you can, and you market for people who have specific tastes. That's the point of having so many models. 'Something for everyone.'
Ken just makes 'em and you either like 'em or you don't. I doubt his factory is 1/5 as large as ARC from my memory of it.
CAT's a great preamp and it sounds like live music. Period. As my not quite-photographic memory recalls, HP said the same thing in his preamp survey back in 1988, and the CAT was the only one at that time that did that, out of ALL the preamps he reviewed.
So….I suppose it's down to whether or not you know what live instruments sound like, or if you just like a sound in and off itself that suits your idea of what music should sound like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: knotscott

Mcbrion

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2013
91
14
313
Connecticut
What does that mean, Myles? That Convergent should hire more people and be more visible or, alternately, that Ken is simply content to make 10-20 preamps a year and wants to live his life, and not be controlled by his business?

Which one are you implying?
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,434
13,467
2,710
London
Hi Mcbrion, how do you rate Jadis compared to ARC, especially for complex classical, dynamic music? I don't like ARC here, NAT audio poor was much better, if anyone has compared Jadis to these let me know
 

LL21

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2010
14,411
2,509
1,448
...Yes, I actually had a dealer admit to me that if he had a 10 year old CAT preamp, he wouldn't bother upgrading to any of the dozen or so electronics brands he was selling...

I agree there are some older products out there that are SOOOO good...and I suspect would still be on the top shelf if in production today. CJ ART 3, Krell FPB700cx, Lyra Connoisseur Preamp, Rockport Sirius III, Original Guarneri, Gryphon Antileon, Rockport Merak Sheritan IIs, etc
 

Mcbrion

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2013
91
14
313
Connecticut
Well, I have to put it this way: I don't know what the ARC sounds like in any system except the one I've heard it in, but I suspect it sounds better than what I'm hearing because MY system sounds better - in the sense of how individual instruments move in an orchestra and also in unison.
I can only speak for the old Jadis (Defy 7 era) in which case, it was a magical amp. It did not do loud dynamics, especially above an F (it definitely did not do ff), but the soft dynamics were dazzling, and that was its strength. The slightest dynamic shift in a flute could be heard even if you were reading a book and engrossed in it. Same with any other instruments. And there was absolutely no grain whatsoever, so the presentation sounded continuous, as it does in real life. In real life, you never get the sense that the orchestra is not in the hall with you, even if you close your eyes. The Jadis did that better than anything I've ever heard. Same way music moves in life. But somebody else will have to advise you on ARC. The last ARC component I owned was an SP-11, back in the 90s. As I have Nola speakers too, I can't imagine Carl being mistaken about what his components sound best with. Frankly, I would imagine he voiced the speakers with ARC, as most designers do. They all have electronics that they feel best show off their product. For Dave Wilson, it was Rowland Coherence preamps and Spectral amp (I knew him when his company was in Novato, California and was there in his workshop several times as he set up my Goldmund turntable). And the original WATT was rolled off up top, while the Spectral amp was slightly bright, so they complimented each other. And the Rowland filled in the lower midrange and bass that the WATT lacked (I eventually got a Rowland because of that very reason).
I think Priaptor could answer this better as he has the large Nolas and an ARC. Given what the (Nola) Contender can do, it's unimaginable that the ARC would have problems with large dynamics: the Contender is pretty fantastic, dynamically speaking, and it's not a large speaker. It certainly can make voices seem eerily "there." And with good electronics, it can make you blink, so real does brass sound on it (I do have Nordost Frey 2 and Tyr 2 interconnects, but everything else is Shunyata). And man, does it sound real at times, just as though somebody is blowing that horn right outside the open window in my music room. Carl uses Odin, of course. But you get the idea. Carl is not someone who uses components that reduce dynamics. All his speakers exist to be dynamically alive.

So, just logically speaking, the ARC should be great. I just haven't heard it in my system. I can say that I think the ARC is going to be more detailed than the Jadis, as Jadis' 'sound' is more 'beautiful' than strictly accurate, and unless it has changed, ARC would be more likely better at dynamics, although perhaps a bit 'whitish' - sounding, tonally speaking. Again, only speculation.
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,434
13,467
2,710
London
Thanks. I ABed my ARC Ref 3 against a NAT Audio Utopia and the latter was much superior on classical (I used Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition for the audition) . Till then I had been pretty happy with ARC. On other stuff, I am pretty indifferent between good preamps, as they all more or less do something nice. The NAT is more fullbodied and bassy (your Rowalnd description sounds similar) while the Ref 3 is more transparent and airy. The speakers were Analysis Audio planars. The only thing is the power amps were NAT, so maybe there was extra synergy that was the reason for the difference.
 

caesar

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2010
4,290
767
1,698
What does that mean, Myles? That Convergent should hire more people and be more visible or, alternately, that Ken is simply content to make 10-20 preamps a year and wants to live his life, and not be controlled by his business?

...?

It's his business and it's his life. Those are his decisions, and I respect them. But there are also dealers who want to make a living, and furthermore, fans are interested about what is best... And what this shows is that just because you build a better mouse trap, the world will not necessarily beat a path to your door if you stay silent.
 

Brian Walsh

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2011
336
29
935
ttsetup.com
It's his business and it's his life. Those are his decisions, and I respect them. But there are also dealers who want to make a living, and furthermore, fans are interested about what is best... And what this shows is that just because you build a better mouse trap, the world will not necessarily beat a path to your door if you stay silent.

+1

People have been after Ken to get a website for many years. It hasn't happened, and at this rate it appears unlikely. Nice guy but he does business the way he wants to, for better or worse.
 

MarkS

New Member
Oct 16, 2014
1
0
0
Between 1997 and 2010, I owned 3 CAT preamps. They were all superb, each sounded better then the last model, and each also sounded better than anything even close to its price. In the end, the lack of balanced, a remote, and the weird volume levels made me move in another direction, and I bought a VTL 7.5. While also a superb preamp, the VTL lacked the CAT's musical magic in my system. As a result, today, I ordered an Absolare preamp to replace the VTL. Tye absolare sounds great, has balanced and a remote (for volume control, which is all I need). I never seriously considered CAT amps, but did hear them several times, and they always sounded good to me.
 

flyer

VIP/Donor
Dec 16, 2012
423
179
1,160
Belgium
Until last week, I was the happy owner of a pair of Lamm M1.2 amps. Just before I sold them I was able to do a direct comparison with a CAT JL2 mk2 of which I had read so much (mostly) good of. I wanted to consider the possibility to keep the CAT as a follow-up to the Lamm to get that extra edge after having owned the Lamm for about 4 years.

The result was not what I expected and so I didn't hold on to the CAT. Although it bettered the Lamm in a few areas: more tubelike midband timbre, a bit more bass output (though not more resolved mind you), I ultimately think the CAT was more of an unpolished diamond compared to the Lamm.

The CAT were in all in all quite rough and not as linear and resolved (anything but) as the Lamm. The latter of course excells in soundstage width and depth, instrument focus, and even dynamics albeit with a bit rounded treble and an ever slight lack of drive in the lower registers... The CAT also made me wish I could pull my listening position 1 meter to the back as is lays out a soundstage in front of the speakers whereas the Lamm are more between and behind the speakers. Of course, the pairing with my loudspeakers (Rockport Avior) may have played a role in that. On the other hand, the CAT are almost deadsilent through the speakers (the transformer did hum slightly by itself).

I can very well think of the CAT as a much better performer when paired with a preamp, but I go direct from my (total)dac to the amps so I want an amp that is good by itself, not because the preamp makes up for its shortcomings.

One disclaimer: I did not check if the bias of all the tubes was set correctly and ignore if that could have had an effect...
 

andromedaaudio

VIP/Donor
Jan 23, 2011
8,350
2,730
1,400
Amsterdam holland
Yes its a bit of a handicapped comparison , as both lamm and cat are designed to be used with a pre , it matters a lot a good pre.
 

ashandger

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2013
406
174
348
Until last week, I was the happy owner of a pair of Lamm M1.2 amps. Just before I sold them I was able to do a direct comparison with a CAT JL2 mk2 of which I had read so much (mostly) good of. I wanted to consider the possibility to keep the CAT as a follow-up to the Lamm to get that extra edge after having owned the Lamm for about 4 years.

The result was not what I expected and so I didn't hold on to the CAT. Although it bettered the Lamm in a few areas: more tubelike midband timbre, a bit more bass output (though not more resolved mind you), I ultimately think the CAT was more of an unpolished diamond compared to the Lamm.


The CAT were in all in all quite rough and not as linear and resolved (anything but) as the Lamm. The latter of course excells in soundstage width and depth, instrument focus, and even dynamics albeit with a bit rounded treble and an ever slight lack of drive in the lower registers... The CAT also made me wish I could pull my listening position 1 meter to the back as is lays out a soundstage in front of the speakers whereas the Lamm are more between and behind the speakers. Of course, the pairing with my loudspeakers (Rockport Avior) may have played a role in that. On the other hand, the CAT are almost deadsilent through the speakers (the transformer did hum slightly by itself).

I can very well think of the CAT as a much better performer when paired with a preamp, but I go direct from my (total)dac to the amps so I want an amp that is good by itself, not because the preamp makes up for its shortcomings.

One disclaimer: I did not check if the bias of all the tubes was set correctly and ignore if that could have had an effect...

Just FYI, the current version of JL2 in now called the "Ultimate" which I am told is significantly better than the JL2 Signature which in turn was better than the JL2 MK2 that you have tried. BTW, I own a JL2 MK2 and have never found it "rough". In my system CAT JL2 creates huge soundstage depth. Hope this Helps!
 

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