ACT series 2 or CT-5 need help

repman · Apr 23, 2011

I bought a new CJ CT-5 that seems to have an electrical or possibly a remote issue with it.

The dealer offered me a used Act series 2 for $1200 more than what I paid for the CT-5 he claims it is significantley beter than the CT-5 does anyone have any experience with these 2 units and maybe give me a mini review?

I appreciate any and all help with this.

Thanks, Larry

mep · Apr 23, 2011

You might want to send an email to Myles Astor as he has lots of experience with CJ gear.

repman · Apr 23, 2011

Mep , thanks for the tip I appreciate it.

microstrip · Apr 23, 2011

I had both side by side for some weeks (until I managed to find a friend wanting the CT5

) - the ACT2 series 2 was a much superior preamplifier. Paying usd 1200 to go from a CT5 to an ACT2 series 2 seems an unbelievable deal. As far as I remember the cost of the ACT2 S2 was almost the double of the CT5 .

Bass of the ACT2 S2 was fuller and the CT5, although very good, seemed more electronic compared to the ACT2 S2. Once you heard the ACT2 S2 you will not want to return to the CT5. BTW, I was using the cj premier 350 with it - a great match. I still listen to this system very often - a good friend of mine now owns it.

BTW, both preamps need a long burnin. Happily I got my ACT2 S2 second hand and did not have to wait. If the preamp is left non-operating for a very long time you have to run the burn-in again.

repman · Apr 23, 2011

Microstrip thanks for the reply, I should have been more clear the ACT series 2 is a used unit that the dealer had just taken in that is why it is only $1200 over the cost of the CT-5 . I appreciate the mini review thanks.

microstrip · Apr 23, 2011

Just in case you did not get it:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/conrad-johnson-act2-line-preamplifier-wes-phillips-november-2007

caesar · Apr 23, 2011

Repman, Jump on it! I couldn't agree more with Microstrip. Act2 surpasses the CT5 in every way. Yes, $1,200 is a lot of money, but in the audiophile world, this is a pittance compared to the sonic improvement. You will be set with a preamp for a long, long time.

repman · Apr 23, 2011

Microstrip and Caesar , thanks for the advice sounds like I will be getting an ACT 2 on Monday

audioblazer · Apr 24, 2011

Once you familiarize yourself with Act 2.2, I strongly suggest that you change the stock tube to NOS tube which you can purchase from partsconnexion. Highly recommended

repman · Apr 24, 2011

Thanks audioblazer any particular one you recommend

repman · Apr 25, 2011

UPDATE, after speaking to the fine folks at CJ - they recommended that I go with the ET-5 over both the CT-5 and the ACT series 2 . They said it is a significant improvement over both of these units and is 98% of what the GAT is .

The ET-5 is on its way I just wish it was as pretty as the CT-5 or ACT pretty plain looking box no tubes showing looks like a SS unit but if it sounds as good as they say I can live with the unimpressive aesthetics.

mep · Apr 25, 2011

I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I prefer the look of the ET-5. I'm not into stereo equipment as art-deco for art-deco's sake. You are paying dearly for that and it doesn't make the sound any better. I would rather my money be invested in the sound quality.

microstrip · Apr 25, 2011

mep said:
I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I prefer the look of the ET-5. I'm not into stereo equipment as art-deco for art-deco's sake. You are paying dearly for that and it doesn't make the sound any better. I would rather my money be invested in the sound quality.

Although I pretend that look is secondary, I really appreciate equipment with good design. It is something that Amir forgot in his "objective characteristics" thread and I envy to objectivistes - since they really believe all equipment sounds the same they can choose the more stylistic. I still regret having sold my complete series 200 stainless steel and gold Primare system. But my ugly Audio Research sounds better and I needed the cash to pay for it.

mep · Apr 25, 2011

Micro-Dont get me wrong, I don't want to own butt-ugly gear. However, I do want as much of my hard earned cash going for buying the circuit parts as possible because that is where the rubber hits the road. Coming up with odd shapes for your preamp that makes it much more expensive to manufacture without doing a damn thing for improving the sound quality is a non-starter for me.

repman · Apr 26, 2011

Well after speaking to the folks at CJ they urged me to forget about both the CT-5 and ACT-2 and get the new ET-5.

They said it is sonically better than both the CT-5 and ACT-2 by a significant margin and to quote them it is 98% of what the GAT is .

I am not especially excited by a big ole gold box astehtically but if it is as good as they are telling me I can live with that .

Now comes 200-300 hrs of break in on those teflon caps Ugggh!!!

KeithR · Apr 28, 2011

repman said:
Well after speaking to the folks at CJ they urged me to forget about both the CT-5 and ACT-2 and get the new ET-5.

They said it is sonically better than both the CT-5 and ACT-2 by a significant margin and to quote them it is 98% of what the GAT is .

I am not especially excited by a big ole gold box astehtically but if it is as good as they are telling me I can live with that .

Now comes 200-300 hrs of break in on those teflon caps Ugggh!!!

Seems like the folks at CJ certainly making a sales pitch. Gee, imagine that---don't pick up a used Reference preamp when a brand new one is so much better! (sarcasm, tsk tsk)

CJ changes their product line so often, its annoying to say the least.

And i agree with you that is one ugly preamp. the ART 2 was magnificent looking.

XV-1 · May 28, 2011

repman said:
Well after speaking to the folks at CJ they urged me to forget about both the CT-5 and ACT-2 and get the new ET-5.

They said it is sonically better than both the CT-5 and ACT-2 by a significant margin and to quote them it is 98% of what the GAT is .

I am not especially excited by a big ole gold box astehtically but if it is as good as they are telling me I can live with that .

Now comes 200-300 hrs of break in on those teflon caps Ugggh!!!

Personally I think you made the right decision. cj pre amps sound better with the 6h30 not in them. The 6922 based will sound a lot more musical for the long term.

repman · May 29, 2011

Turntable thanks; after living with this pre I have to agree it is one sweet sounding piece. I am more than happy! It has a relaxed 3 dimensional quality that just makes music sound right. I am happy with my decision.

repman · Jun 2, 2011

Myles lets just say I am a Happy Camper. I am really enjoying this preamp it is mostly broken in now and I can say it has met my expectations.

repman · Jun 2, 2011

Myles, will anyone be reviewing this preamp soon ?

ACT series 2 or CT-5 need help

New Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

New Member

VIP/Donor

New Member

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

New Member

Member Sponsor

New Member

New Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

VIP/Donor

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

New Member

Attachments

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Similar threads