Audio Research vs. Conrad Johnson

[jadis]

I am astonished that someone could do such a matching! Most ARC amplifiers are fully balanced from the input to the output transformer and do not have the phase inverters for push pull when operated in unbalanced mode. They can not be used in unbalanced mode using adapters - the only proper way to use them with a cj would be using a balancing input transformer. If you look at ARC ref610 manuals you will find only balanced specifications. Used with the ART the REF 610 should have sounded anemic and with some distortion - the push or the pull side would not be working!

Ahh. That's the problem. My friend did use adapter plugs to hook the ARC into the unbalanced CJ. And the result was exactly as you pointed out, anemic.

 

[jadis]

So now I am more informed about this balanced and unbalanced thing. My old Jadis JPL preamp does not have balanced outputs. My ARC VS115 amp has both balanced and unbalanced inputs but the manual says to use a jumper when using unbalanced cables. I did not understand why there was a need for a jumper as initially I did not put the jumper and the sound was OK! Later on, I put the jumper, and I felt the gain became lesser, like I had to up the volume a notch or 2 from my old setting without the jumper. I really do not know the explanation to this.

 

[tdh888]

I am astonished that someone could do such a matching! Most ARC amplifiers are fully balanced from the input to the output transformer and do not have the phase inverters for push pull when operated in unbalanced mode. They can not be used in unbalanced mode using adapters - the only proper way to use them with a cj would be using a balancing input transformer. If you look at ARC ref610 manuals you will find only balanced specifications. Used with the ART the REF 610 should have sounded anemic and with some distortion - the push or the pull side would not be working!

I think this was the reason in the mid 90's when the VT series (130, 150) and the V (70,140)w/c all had balnced inputs only. The company introduced the (Balance line Drivers) BL 1 , BL 2 and BL 3. This were used so that you can mate this amps w/ single ended preamps from other manufacturers to prevent the mismatch. But these components contributed their own coloration and signature when in use so these products were phase out at once. (Another reason could be a most of their customers usually bought them as pairs (ARC preamp & amp)

 

[robertk]

I have had both for decades. I only use a cj Premier 4 for midrange, so that in and of itself can change things. But I like that CJ midrange better. I like the Audio Research ss amps better for bass duties. And prefer the Audio Research pre-amps.

The only concern has been tube failures with the CJ---usually take out a few parts with them & I have since given up on any new tube. I know, they all have "great mids" right? Then again, what tube manufaturer does not make that claim? I sure wish the tube manufacturers did anything near as good of a job as CJ and Audio Research perform.

 

[LL21]

hear, hear...big fan of both...but always owned CJ and never ARC in the end. Am contemplating an upgrade of my CJ GAT to Series 2. Have long admired the ARC Ref 5, 5SE, 10 and Anniversary which i have heard casually over the years and sometimes auditioned seriously once or twice.

 

[Lee]

Based on my friends' experience, ARC are more reliable and sound more neutral.

 

[XV-1]

Based on my friends' experience, ARC are more reliable and sound more neutral.

Based on MY experience, cj has wonderful reliability and sounds more like music.

 

[Sunnyboy1956]

I have owned the ARC 2LSB followed by the SP-16. I thereafter switched to CJ with the LP70S and CT5 replacing the latter nearly 3 years ago with the GAT. I never had any reliability issues with either ARC or CJ though I find CJ's customer service to be outstanding. Lew Johnson not only replied to every mail but provided instructions to convert my Agon purchased GAT from 110v to 220v. That incidentally, is a no go with ARC.
I did demo the ARC Ref 10 at a NYC dealer and was not impressed . Can't say whether it was the ARC pre/power or the speakers but something did not work for me. IMHO, the GAT is the finest remote tube pre on the planet. With 25db gain LOMCs are a breeze and this is significant if you are primarily into vinyl with <0.5 mV carts.
To return to the OP, the house sound of ARC and CJ has tended to converge in recent years for the top of the line components. IME, it's no longer true that CJ has a sweet syrupy sound and ARC is more clinical. The GAT and Ref Anniversary sound more alike but are by no means identical. The GAT with the supplied EH 6922s is a decent preamp but with a pair of NOS Telefunken CCA's is sensational.
Pradeep

 

[Argonaut]

What comprised the associated equipment at your NYC demo Pradeep? I don't recall reading such a negative assessment of the Ref10, far from it!

 

[Sunnyboy1956]

The ARC was a Ref Anniversary . I did not intend to convey anything negative about the ARC pre except that the demo did not work for me. This could have been for a variety of reasons unrelated to ARC eg room set up , matching components, source, the list could go on .

 

[Argonaut]

Kinda confused now P

 

[XV-1]

I have owned the ARC 2LSB followed by the SP-16. I thereafter switched to CJ with the LP70S and CT5 replacing the latter nearly 3 years ago with the GAT. I never had any reliability issues with either ARC or CJ though I find CJ's customer service to be outstanding. Lew Johnson not only replied to every mail but provided instructions to convert my Agon purchased GAT from 110v to 220v. That incidentally, is a no go with ARC.
I did demo the ARC Ref 10 at a NYC dealer and was not impressed . Can't say whether it was the ARC pre/power or the speakers but something did not work for me. IMHO, the GAT is the finest remote tube pre on the planet. With 25db gain LOMCs are a breeze and this is significant if you are primarily into vinyl with <0.5 mV carts.
To return to the OP, the house sound of ARC and CJ has tended to converge in recent years for the top of the line components. IME, it's no longer true that CJ has a sweet syrupy sound and ARC is more clinical. The GAT and Ref Anniversary sound more alike but are by no means identical. The GAT with the supplied EH 6922s is a decent preamp but with a pair of NOS Telefunken CCA's is sensational.
Pradeep

I like and agree. Lew Johnson is the nicest guy in hifi. Its not all about the next sale for cj, its about the customer being happy.

I bought a ref 5e demo pre amp , so it was fully run in. I had this thought in my head that to get the best out of my D'agostino srereo amp it had to be all balanced.
In direct comparison the GAT was faster, better tighter bass, the music sounded alive. The ARC sounded bloated and slow in comparison. Nice for simple jazz music I guess.

Ref5e quickly sold. Luckily I had not sold my GAT, I did not realise how good I had it.

The GAT is in quite a few systems with fully balanced amps for one simple reason - It Just Sounds Right

 

[Sunnyboy1956]

Kinda confused now P

Why the confusion ? Plenty of really satisfied ARC owners just as there are satisfied CJ owners. No right or wrong just a matter of individual ears/taste.

 

[Sunnyboy1956]

Is it me or are others experiencing the same thing ? Whenever i reply quoting someone , the words appear with the same picture with the Jethro Tull LP. This has been going on for sometime and could be a bug in my computer

 

[Argonaut]

I bought a ref 5e demo pre amp , so it was fully run in. I had this thought in my head that to get the best out of my D'agostino srereo amp it had to be all balanced.
In direct comparison the GAT was faster, better tighter bass, the music sounded alive. The ARC sounded bloated and slow in comparison. Nice for simple jazz music I guess.

Ref5e quickly sold. Luckily I had not sold my GAT, I did not realise how good I had it.

The GAT is in quite a few systems with fully balanced amps for one simple reason - It Just Sounds Right

Not entirely an even Flagship vs Flagship comparison tho, An Ref40 would have afforded a more level playing field IMO.

 

[Argonaut]

Why the confusion ? Plenty of really satisfied ARC owners just as there are satisfied CJ owners. No right or wrong just a matter of individual ears/taste.

Pradeep...In your initial post you stated Ref10 in NYC, then Ref40 in answer to my query.

 

[LL21]

I have owned the ARC 2LSB followed by the SP-16. I thereafter switched to CJ with the LP70S and CT5 replacing the latter nearly 3 years ago with the GAT. I never had any reliability issues with either ARC or CJ though I find CJ's customer service to be outstanding. Lew Johnson not only replied to every mail but provided instructions to convert my Agon purchased GAT from 110v to 220v. That incidentally, is a no go with ARC.
I did demo the ARC Ref 10 at a NYC dealer and was not impressed . Can't say whether it was the ARC pre/power or the speakers but something did not work for me. IMHO, the GAT is the finest remote tube pre on the planet. With 25db gain LOMCs are a breeze and this is significant if you are primarily into vinyl with <0.5 mV carts.
To return to the OP, the house sound of ARC and CJ has tended to converge in recent years for the top of the line components. IME, it's no longer true that CJ has a sweet syrupy sound and ARC is more clinical. The GAT and Ref Anniversary sound more alike but are by no means identical. The GAT with the supplied EH 6922s is a decent preamp but with a pair of NOS Telefunken CCA's is sensational.
Pradeep

Hey Pradeep,

Totally agree about CJ GAT. I have enjoyed my CJ equipment for going on 16 years and fortunately never had to take one component in (out of 3) for repairs.

Are you considering the recently announced upgrade to CJ GAT Series 2? First upgrade since it first came out in 2008/9 or so?

 

[LL21]

Not entirely an even Flagship vs Flagship comparison tho, An Ref40 would have afforded a more level playing field IMO.

Yes, i think (FWIW) Jonathan Valin once answered the same to one of my queries regarding the big ARC vs the CJ GAT, and he said the same...he felt the CJ GAT was superior to the ARC Ref 5 and was more appropriately compared with the ARC Ref 40.

 

[Sunnyboy1956]

Harlequin my bad. It was the Anniversary Reference, the 2 box unit.
Pradeep

 

[Sunnyboy1956]

Lloyd
I am going to watch and wait on the GAT upgrade. Not easy to ship the GAT to the US and back. The performance with the Tele CCA's from Brent Jesse ( at usd 1249 a pair with 2 year warranty) is stunning.
Cheers
Pradeep