Conrad Johnson new products 2012

[ronenash]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

Good insights, Ron.

Regarding the LP-series, I still think it's one of their finest sounding efforts, clearly superior to the Pr11/12 series.

I also think the series are a beautiful amp from a design perspective.

Absolutely Stephen. The design is beautiful for sure and they are great amps. Curtainly much better than the PR11/PR12 and better looking than the current LP66/LP125.

Sound wise I think they LP140 and LP125M SE should be very similar.

[Rafale]

Originally Posted by ronenash

Absolutely Stephen. The design is beautiful for sure and they are great amps. Curtainly much better than the PR11/PR12 and better looking than the current LP66/LP125.

Sound wise I think they LP140 and LP125M SE should be very similar.

In these conditions the question is: is the LP125M SE upper to the LP140 M?.....

[turntable]

Originally Posted by tima

I agree about the product 'gap'.

They seem in a bit of a bind wrt the naming scheme using numbers whose sequence crossed amps and preamps. (for example, Premier 12=amp, Premier 16=pre). I believe the ACT-2 was intended to be a follow-on to the ART - whether that succeeded is one question, but it seems to have introduced a product line that was meant to be a notch above the Premier series, if not 'state of the art'. Presumably the ART amplifier would be above a Premier level amp as would an ACT. Once they went beyond ART to ACT, that seemed to open the door to naming things in a less clear way (to put it kindly). Then there is the 'GAT' name which seems parallel with ART in terms of quality implication - is that right?

I fear it is too late for CJ to go back to the Premier nomenclature, but their current naming schemes does not seem as coherent as it once was. Even "back then" the sequencing was confusing as a higher numbered Premier product did not necessarily reflect its place in the hierarchy of price or sonics. (eg. Premier 16 vs 17). But for a time, if it said 'Premier' you had the general idea that it was within their top of the line.

Some numbers in their naming tie generally to wattage. The whole 'ET' (Enhanced Triode) and 'LP' thing I never quite grasped. It would help if they parsed it all out a bit cleaner.

Fwiw, there was a Premier 140.

The premier numbering scheme was quite simple. Each premier pre or amp took the next number. It was cj's premium audio line above the mv amps and pv pre amps. Premier 1 amplifier in 1981 was the first release all the way up to premier 18 pre amp around 2003

The ART pre amp was a limited edition best effort/reference pre amp of 250 units. The prem 16 was the trickle down mini art pre amp. The prem 17 released later was the cheaper version of the prem16.

Then for some reason cj dropped the prem numbering and released the prem 140 tube amp and then prem 350 ss amp.

The ACT2 was the next normal production premium pre amp.

Now we have the two ultra expensive limited edition GAT pre and ART amps.

Clear as mud

[Myles B. Astor]

Originally Posted by turntable

I believe their is a fundamental gap in cj's amplifier line.

You go from the ET250 @ 8k to LP125's at 9.5k, a bit more for the SE, then to 35k for the ART.

cj is throwing away $$ to the likes of ARC and co. There needs to be a SS or hybrid premier quality amplifier at around the 12 - 17k mark. A monoblock SS/hybrid amp will sell a lot better than a single chassis 350A type amp. After all us audiophiles are all about show and real estate right :-)


there is probably an arguement for a large KT120 based monoblock in the 20k range to off an alternative to the ARC ref250.


One last thing. conrad johnson need to bring back the Premier numbering - that always was the cj reference grade and needs to be resurected imo
I believe the LP70, 140 and 275 would have sold a lot better named premier 19, 20 and 21 or prem70, prem 140 and prem 275. That has always been cj's mantra until the prem18 pre.

What do you fellow cj lovers out there think?

Well I'd be shocked if cj doesn't come out with an amplifier based around the KT120s. Something like the ART would be between 5-600 watts assuming 150 wpc/pair of output tubes. Problem is what do you tell ART amplifier owners who just purchased their amps--and I assume maybe 1/2 of the 100 or so that were going to be released have been sold? That their amplifier is obselete? I would imagine any update would be expensive as it would require at minimum changes to the power and output transformers.

I also think you'll see a ART/GAT level phono section.

Where cj is probably missing the boat is in digital. The USB Dac is the first digital arena in quite some time. (Assuming their forays into HT was a dead end---as were earlier ones into tts, speakers and importing the Argent cartridge ).

[TommyC]

I thought CJ was coming out with a new CD player a few years back. What happened to that?

[Puma Cat]

I think C-J realizes that the writing is on the wall for CD players; the future is in music servers. Why build an expensive CD transport mechanism when you can get rid of the transport altogether? A music server more closely approaches the TRIZ concept of ideality. The only thing I use my Oppo for now for music is playing SACDs (and Blu-Ray videos, which it does a spectacular job of, BTW).

[bgiliberti]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

I think C-J realizes that the writing is on the wall for CD players; the future is in music servers. ...

Then why the new DAC? Or is that the same as a server. You can see that my knowledge is in the stone age....

[Puma Cat]

Oh, the DAC is the digital to analog portion of the music server, what makes the music!

I guess I should have provided my operational definition of music server: a means of storing, accessing, and serving up digital music files plus D/A conversion so that the files can be played over a system (plus the cabling, etc).

I see you have Harbeths...you have excellent taste in speakers. If I were not using Dyns, I would be using Harbeths.

[Rayooo]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

I think C-J realizes that the writing is on the wall for CD players; the future is in music servers. Why build an expensive CD transport mechanism when you can get rid of the transport altogether? A music server more closely approaches the TRIZ concept of ideality. The only thing I use my Oppo for now for music is playing SACDs (and Blu-Ray videos, which it does a spectacular job of, BTW).

Same here with my Oppo! ...and to make matters worse, I'm slowly selling off my SACDs. (only really had a couple dozen anyway, most of which were hybrids)

for sure CJ must not see any benefit whatsoever to supporting CD playback...else they at least would have put something other than a single USB input on the HD3.

[Rafale]

Linn completely stopped the production of CDP for 2 years.....