Asking for c-j advice...

[Puma Cat]

Originally Posted by bgiliberti

I think of 'sweetness' being more about the midrange than the highs or lows. I was told that the midrange on both editions of the Classic Preamp would be the same, because the Tcaps are only used in parts of the circuitry that affect the extremes, not the midrange. I don't know if the Premier 7 upgrade involves similarly limited use of Teflon, but if so, it suggests that your midrange would be unaffected, which I think is what you want. It might even be a sort of best of both worlds mod.

It could well be....I've often wondered this myself; I've just been reluctant to risk that midrange sweetness. And, yes, the Series 2 upgrade is primarily replacement of a large no. of the stock caps with Teflon caps.

Also the Series 2 upgrade is quite expensive: $3000.

You can actually buy a used Premier 17 LS2 for less money.

[bgiliberti]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

It could well be....I've often wondered this myself; I've just been reluctant to risk that midrange sweetness. And, yes, the Series 2 upgrade is primarily replacement of a large no. of the stock caps with Teflon caps.

Also the Series 2 upgrade is quite expensive: $3000.

You can actually buy a used Premier 17 LS2 for less money.

The mod on the classic is only $500, I think, so the $3000 one for the Premier would probably involve many more circuits and changes to the sound, including the midrange, perhaps. So I'd be worrying about that too on a Premier 7 upgrade if you like the warmer type of midrange (which I do too.).

[Puma Cat]

BGiliberti,
The Classic circuitry is quite similar to the PV10/PV12, and has notably fewer caps than a Premier 17.

I was told by Ed at C-J that the cost of the Series 2 upgrade was due to the number of caps that are replaced...as you can see from this pic, there a lot of caps in a Premier 17:

[repman]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

I have a CT-5 that I've spent the better part of a year running in, and now that it is, it's only fair to point out that the CT-5 is NOT a sterile sounding preamp, far from it. It is more neutral than older series C-J preamps e.g. the PV and Premier series, but it is still a superb sounding preamp that is very musical, engaging and involving, not to mention incredibly detailed, transparent, fast and quiet. It is ANYTHING but sterile. I would agree that it does not sound as warm as the older or non-Teflon capped C-J based preamps, but stating it is sterile sounding is inaccurate and does a disservice to this very fine preamp. C-J quite simply does not build sterile or unmusical sounding gear. While it is more neutral than many C-J preamps, it is still warmer and sweeter sounding than an Octave or ARC. I have both a more classic "warmer" sounding Premier 17 and the CT-5; and have friends who have heard both. Some prefer the Pr17 while others, including Jeff Whitlock of A/V Solutions really prefers
the CT-5.

At this level of gear, and CT-5 is built to the same level of engineering specification as the ET-5, if not higher, what constitutes the better preamp is often a matter of personal preference rather than "absolutes", whatever those are.

My own CT-5 has recently made another quantum jump in its sound quality, and the attributes that had me preferring my Pr17 (a fuller, weightier presentation, though the 17 is slower, less detailed and transparent and has a higher noise floor) are no longer an issue. I listened at length to my CT-5 this weekend and it's performance had me shaking my head in disbelief at times.

I attribute the amount of time it took the CT-5 to come around to the very long time it takes to burn in the Teflon caps; the 300 hours figure that C-J provides and you read in reviews is a gross underestimate, 1000 hours is more like it. Be advised if you buy any new or relativly new Teflon capped component, dealing with the cap burn-in is pretty horrid for quite a while. I bought my CT-5 with over 300 hours on it in February, and it sounded, in a word, awful. I've spent the rest of the year burning it it in; it started notably improving back in July, and has recently made another "quantum jump" in performance. "Getting there" can be frustrating and painful, but once these these Teflon based components do "get there" they are spectacular; just ask Philippe with about his GAT.

Puma I did not mean to ruffle your feathers or insult the CT-5 I think it is a very good preamp and I enjoyed it when I owned mine. Slow-Geezer was asking my opinion and I gave him my impressions of both, maybe my choice of words were not perfect but I am not a seasoned reviewer. When I said it sounded more sterile I was trying to describe how it sounded compared to the ET-5 to me it is a little bit thinner sounding and not as rich in tone as the ET-5 all ears are different I just prefer the richness of the ET over the CT they are both fantastic and I do not think you could go wrong with either its just the sound you prefer.

[jimtranr]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

Personally, I think AndyPandy made the right decision to go with the "base" model ET-3, because I've heard this preamp and it is really a sweet-sounding pre. It's a major reason that I've not upgraded my Premier 17 to Series 2 status is that I'm a bit afraid I'd lose that magical sweetness that the Premier 17 Series 1 has...and it's one sweet pre; one of the sweetest I've ever heard. Not the most detailed, transparent, quiet or fastest pre I've heard, but it's really got it's own special magic and it's musical as all get-out.

Which, aside from how the cost (Ed told me $3550) would impact my ability to upgrade other elements of my system, is why I've held off on upgrading my 17 to Series 2. Beyond that, upgrading the 17's power cord (the Oppo's, too) has injected greater transparency, detail, "blackness", and perceived agility into the mix--with a much shorter burn-in (about 200 hours) than Teflon would entail--without in any way defacing the magic that's characteristic of the 17 (that's with stock EH6922's) and how well it plays with others in this system.

(That's not a knock on CJD Teflon. If I were buying "new," I'd most likely go the SE route and put up with six to ten months of relative hell.)

[Puma Cat]

Originally Posted by repman

Puma I did not mean to ruffle your feathers or insult the CT-5 I think it is a very good preamp and I enjoyed it when I owned mine. Slow-Geezer was asking my opinion and I gave him my impressions of both, maybe my choice of words were not perfect but I am not a seasoned reviewer. When I said it sounded more sterile I was trying to describe how it sounded compared to the ET-5 to me it is a little bit thinner sounding and not as rich in tone as the ET-5 all ears are different I just prefer the richness of the ET over the CT they are both fantastic and I do not think you could go wrong with either its just the sound you prefer.

No worries! My feathers weren't ruffled in any way!

[Volks]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

BGiliberti,
The Classic circuitry is quite similar to the PV10/PV12, and has notably fewer caps than a Premier 17.

I was told by Ed at C-J that the cost of the Series 2 upgrade was due to the number of caps that are replaced...as you can see from this pic, there a lot of caps in a Premier 17:

Wow ...certainly not an empty box lol..........i swear the more i read these CJ threads....the more i want to "Dip my Toe" into CJ water and buy another system...

[Puma Cat]

You'll be forever spoiled if you do....just ask Joe.

[joeinid]

Originally Posted by Volks

Wow ...certainly not an empty box lol..........i swear the more i read these CJ threads....the more i want to "Dip my Toe" into CJ water and buy another system...

It's just like potato chips, you can't stop at one. CJ really offers a unique, satisfying natural sound!

[Volks]

Originally Posted by joeinid

It's just like potato chips, you can't stop at one. CJ really offers a unique, satisfying natural sound!

LOL i like that.....although i must admit i am trying to quit eating potato chips....fat little buggers they are lol