ARC vs CJ

[David Matz]

These 2 brands are probably the most popular tube brands on this site, and in the audiophile world in general. ARC may be a bit more respected by dealers, but this is anecdotal research.

What do folks like about each brand?


CJ has been called euphonic; ARC has been called neutral - but why use tubes then? CJ is supposed to have a golden glow. ARC is supposed to be "off-white".

I am in the CJ camp with CJ Premier 350, and I really like how the equipment gets out of the way and presents the music as a whole. That said, I never heard ARC with Logans. When I heard ARC with other speakers, I was not impressed with the systems, but that may not be ARC's fault.

I would love to hear some civil opinions on this.

 

[SundayNiagara]

These 2 brands are probably the most popular tube brands on this site, and in the audiophile world in general. ARC may be a bit more respected by dealers, but this is anecdotal research.

What do folks like about each brand?


CJ has been called euphonic; ARC has been called neutral - but why use tubes then? CJ is supposed to have a golden glow. ARC is supposed to be "off-white".

I am in the CJ camp with CJ Premier 350, and I really like how the equipment gets out of the way and presents the music as a whole. That said, I never heard ARC with Logans. When I heard ARC with other speakers, I was not impressed with the systems, but that may not be ARC's fault.

I would love to hear some civil opinions on this.

Same, but different! Which flavor suits your taste?

 

[Bernard]

I used to have a CJ Premier 6 (a MC pre-preamp with nuvistors) and a CJ PV3 (their entry-level preamp), and really enjoyed the combination. Was it euphonic? Perhaps, but then I was using them with a Koetsu Rosewood, which may not be neutral, but is truly gorgeous.

I borrowed an ARC SP9 and tried it in place of the CJ combination. It was definitely less euphonic, and really got out of the way of the music, so I bought it. The best way to describe the ARC was that it was more clear top to bottom; definitely less euphonic. Why use tubes? The tubes/SS difference was not a factor in my decision - I bought the ARC because it was so much better. Perhaps a more valid comparison would have been with something higher up CJ's preamp line.

Several years later I had a chance to buy used ARC mono-blocks at a reasonable price; I'm really happy with them.

I have heard the "off-white" and "bleached" claims about ARC, but I don't hear it. Phone-wise it could be said that my Koetsu is compensating, but then I don't hear it with CD's either. However, I do find that LP's sound so much better than CD's.

As an aside: when I first bought my ML's I was using an underpowered (50watts/channel) Copland tube amplifier, and was aware of the limitation, so I borrowed a 100 watt/channel SS Copland power amplifier from the dealer (says a lot for buying from a dealer). There was definitely more power and better control in the bass, but I preferred the tube amp. That at least establishes my biases.

 

[User211]

I just like the way ARC gear looks... kind of just "out of the lab".

Actually, the V140 (a tube/SS hybrid) sold me my 1st pair of Aerius. A superb but extremely expensive amp at the time.

Now I am older and wiser, I think both ARC and CJ should implement some good PSE 211 monoblock based designs. The 6550/KT88 is a good tube, but it ain't as good as a 211... no way baby! At least the amps I have now are much better than an Air Tight ATM2 - which is a very well reviewed 6550/KT88 based amp.

The only CJ I have heard recently is the 350 driving Avalon Eidelons... not my bag, I am afraid.

Can't help but feel that the REF210s and 610T won't be pretty awesome, though. Heard a REF110 in Hong Kong briefly but not enough to make serious comment.

The amp I'd like to check out is this one: http://www.caryaudio.com/products/classic/CAD211AE.html. Pretty rare beast over here, though.

 

[aliveatfive]

I've been a fan of ARC gear for years and have owned quite a few pieces. What I like about the current incarnation is that the amplification truly gets out of the way of the music. You can close your eyes and really believe you were at the event. I currently have the Ref 110 (driving my Summits,) the Ref 3 and the PH 7. This combination creates a soundstage that must be heard. In comparison to the earlier ARC stuff, I find it less "sandpapery." If you're looking for euphony, look elsewhere. This stuff gets it real.

 

[Gordon Gray]

My observations on CJ tube sound versus SS. I previously owned one of the lower end CJ tube preamps and swiched to the Premier 18LS, which is CJ's only SS preamp.

Major increases in openess, transparency, dynamics, and mid / low bass definition. I still have the unit after five years or so and have no desire to shop for anything else.

GG

 

[Rich]

In general, I think ARC is slightly drier and more neutral overall, while CJ is warmer and more full and rounded in its presentation. I also think these differences are becoming less and less with each new generation of products from both companies.

 

[SundayNiagara]

In general, I think ARC is slightly drier and more neutral overall, while CJ is warmer and more full and rounded in its presentation. I also think these differences are becoming less and less with each new generation of products from both companies.

Some people might say that CJ has a slightly warmer sound than ARC.

 

[tonepub]

I agree with the last two posts. Especially with the ACT2 using the same 6H30 tube that the ARC Ref uses, their sound is getting closer and closer all the time. I also find the Ref stuff just a touch drier than the ACT 2/Prem 350, but not enough that I couldn't live with either.

Have owned both over the years and have had excellent luck with both. My friend Harvey Gilbert who is the ML rep has an ARC Ref preamp and a 130SE power amp with his Summits and Descent and it sounds awesome too.

I'm getting a Ref 110 in for review shortly, so it will be interesting.

I bought the Premier 350 (SS) to go with the ACT 2, because with my system being on 12 hours a day, I didn't want to keep going through tubes and I wanted the ability to have an amplifier that would be able to play anything in terms of speakers that came along for review, but I've been very pleased with the sound. Not warm and romantic like the old CJ stuff.

Both companies are great companies to work with and they stand behind their stuff back to day 1.

I would compare them to an AMG Mercedes and a BMW M car. You will probably prefer one over the other, but both are excellent.

 

[tonepub]

And while we are at it, I prefer the ACT2/series 2 to the ART 3. Our technical editor has one (used to have an ACT2) and is going back. The ART has a little bit more of the CJ warmth, but the ACT2 is more neutral, much like the ARC Ref.

Seriously, I could live with either and be very happy.

If you want big power that's more on the romantic side, check out the Manley 250s! 130wpc in triode mode with 10 EL-34's per side. Talk about midrange magic! And these will drive the Summits no prob!

 

[Steelhead]

Dave,

I have enjoyed conrad johnson gear for years. I fell in love with their stuff in the late 70's (by accident, I was there to pick up a solid state Hafler amp I had bought and overheard a demo that slayed me).

I eventually bought a PV11 preamp and Premier 11a that I ran for years. The PV11 had the signature warmth but was not highly resolving and speakers like Martin Logans can quickly reveal this to you. My buddy borrowed it and his criticism was that "someone threw a blanket over the sound". I enjoyed it's laid back presentation but it is not everyone's cup of tea. The 11a amp was and is a fantastic amp and although underpowered on my Logans, I loved what it did to make the panels sing.

I replaced the PV11 with a Supratek Chenin which still has the warmth but is highly resolving and I am done as this is as nice as I need and it has the gain for my low output moving coils. I replaced the 11a for premier 12's to expand the headroom and dynamic range.

My friend has AR front ends (I think SP6 and LS7 phono) running through Quicksilver and Antique Sound Labs amps to modified Horns and it sounds amazing. The AR gear sounds great and his sound is very dynamic with exquisite rendering of cymbals, bells, and high frequencies in general. Wonderful speed with nice decay that is very involving.

So my experience is that both are finely made and well worth owning. Jeff is up with the latest and I guess both cj and AR have kept up with the times and improved their products so that it is very competitive with any thing that's out there.

User211 has a point. Another buddy here has highly modified Klisph K-horns running Dan Allen and Quicksilver SET's with Allen and Quicksilver preamps. The SET's are based on 2A3 and 300B tubes and are jaw droppingly good. Athough I hate to say CJ could in any sense be considered "mechanical", that is what I was thinking when those SET's were playing. the SET's sure can make you realize that there is more than one way to skin a cat.

The fact that he also has (three) tri-amped Quicksilver push pulls (55 wpc) available to hook up and compare and three out of four of us picked the 9 watt SET as superior kind of sums it up.

So, I remain in the cj camp (wonderful reliability and sound for the money) and my limited exposure to Audio Research has been positive and I really respect how those SP6 & LS7 functions and sounds.

 

[amey01]

MMM - we like ARC......

 

[User211]

User211 has a point. Another buddy here has highly modified Klisph K-horns running Dan Allen and Quicksilver SET's with Allen and Quicksilver preamps. The SET's are based on 2A3 and 300B tubes and are jaw droppingly good. Athough I hate to say CJ could in any sense be considered "mechanical", that is what I was thinking when those SET's were playing. the SET's sure can make you realize that there is more than one way to skin a cat.

The fact that he also has (three) tri-amped Quicksilver push pulls (55 wpc) available to hook up and compare and three out of four of us picked the 9 watt SET as superior kind of sums it up.

I used to know a bloke that made Voyd turntables - not that well but we both worked for the same Aerospace company. Interesting design TT - 3 motors and a bullet proof Lexan platter! The theory behind this was to use a lightweight high energy dissipating platter but keep the speed constant with bags of torque. Anyway - I once went round to his cellar to have a listen to some Snell Type Js (highly efficient paper cones), a Voyd with a Audionote IO cartridge, Helius Orion tonearm and some 2A3 based Audio Innovations monoblocks - "The First" I believe they were called.

Absolutely staggered by it - the resolution of the system was absolutely unbelievable! The impact of the snare drum on one particular recording just sounding like a guy was sitting there in front of you banging it. Extremely 3D too and very holographic. It came at a cost of revealing loads of vinyl noise, and I mean copious amounts - but boy was that an education!

To this day, I have never heard a more immediate in-your-face sounding system. It's hard to explain, but it wasn't an easy listen - the total opposite of dinner party background music - that's for sure. But that isn't to say it wasn't excellent.

For all the research that has been done on the best material to use for dynamic driver cones, NEVER underestimate the ability of simple paper!

Anway, simple tube circuits can sound absolutely astonishing - but many have no power to drive stats with. That's why I said PSE i.e. parallel single ended. You can coax more Watts that way - but probably at a slight disadvantage to a true SET. They just do things that nothing else can.

The best sounding power tube types in the world are all triodes, IMHO.

It has just occured to me that was 20 years ago. That cartridge is still current but extremely expensive. And nothing will have changed - i.e. that system will still sound completely beyond belief!

Here's some info on The First: http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:68hSbYZnpsAJ:members.1012surfnet.at/tube.audio/Audio%2520Innovations.htm+audio+innovations+the+first&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1

Read the design criterion! It was a push-pull, directly heated triode design. I think SET came into vogue once people realised what designs like this could do.

 

[jfm]

A question for ARC fans:

My ARC dealer has offered a trade-in on my Meridian 558.1 amp (5-channel solid state, 200 wpc, can run balanced and I run it that way) toward ARC V140 monoblocks. I'll be adding about $1k. Vintage of both amps would be about the same.

While I like my Meridian amp, biamping 2 channels into my Aeons, I have an ARC LS-17 preamp and curious about the synergy that an ARC preamp plus ARC tube amp would give. I would run the amp in balanced mode.

In my place, would you do the deal?

There's little information about the V140 and no formal reviews around. Some say it's magical, some say it's hard and bright.

My system is a dedicated audio + video setup, so I'd be also running the V140s for movies. Since I use a NAD receiver as pre-pro for HT, I could possibly use that for movies and dedicate the V140s for music, or even biamp the woofer with the NAD and the panel with the V140s. (I realize this won't give me perfectly matched levels but I won't be finicky about that aspect).

For music I listen mostly to jazz, with a bit of classical.

Hope you guys can chime in. Thanks!

 

[User211]

Well, I thought the V140 was amazing driving the Aerius as soon as it became available in the UK. The Aeon isn't too dissimilar to the Aerius.

I heard it paying some Elvis tracks which had been recorded from a turntable onto a CDR - I think it was a top flight Micromega player which used to have a thick perspex lid the size of the player. Can't remember the model.

Now that doesn't sound like a great source i.e. CDR from a record, but I can tell you the realism of Elvis's voice was unbelievable! I bought the Aerius as a result, but when I had them home, I realised the V140 was as much to blame.

Anyway, he's a dealer. I know they are huge monos, but hike 'em home for a dem, surely? Whilst they are a hybrid, they use FETs, which are probably the closest to tube sounding transistor type. They might have some hardness as a result with some material, but get 'em home and find out!

 

[twich54]

I've both over the years myself, but for the past seventeen years it's been ARC in the mix. As others have said it's a personal thing, they are both great and IMO, with a resolving transducer like our M/L's, like Seth said, ARC just gets it right. As for me my Rogue M-150's combined with my ARC LS-26 do so as well.

FWIW, if I owned what would be a 'bright' speaker (ie. Klipsch) I believe CJ would be a better match in all probability in 'taming' said speaker. FWIW, I also beleive Cary Audio gear more closely resembles that of CJ as well.

 

[tonepub]

I just talked to someone at ARC and they confirmed that the V140 is a slightly upgraded version of the Classic 120's that I used to own with balanced inputs as someone mentioned here.

It isn't a full blown triode amp, but is run in triode mode and I would not call that amp forward or edgy at all.

As for the comparison of CJ to Cary, pretty far off. CJ has much more resolution and much higher build quality than the Cary stuff.

What a number of people miss here is the difference between some of the current stuff and the more classic CJ. Yep, the classic CJ is very warm, romantic (and even dark sometimes) gear. The CT5, ACT2, Premier 350 and the LP series monoblocks have a much more modern sound that is a lot closer to BAT and ARC than what they used to produce.

The current BAT, ARC and CJ are all fantastic products and deciding between them is really splitting hairs. While I'm sure you would respond a bit more strongly to one over the other, they are all quite good.

 

[RichTeer]

The current BAT, ARC and CJ are all fantastic products and deciding between them is really splitting hairs. While I'm sure you would respond a bit more strongly to one over the other, they are all quite good.

For suitably large values of quite, presumably...

 

[twich54]

As for the comparison of CJ to Cary, pretty far off. CJ has much more resolution and much higher build quality than the Cary stuff.

What a number of people miss here is the difference between some of the current stuff and the more classic CJ. Yep, the classic CJ is very warm, romantic (and even dark sometimes) gear. .

yep, I was lementing back to my CJ days relative the 'warmth', etc. I don't have enough seat time with the newer offerings from both to really judge. Although I will say that listening through Carys curent pre-amp offerings, I do recall them to be somewhat emphasized in midrange 'bloom'.

 

[User211]

The current BAT, ARC and CJ are all fantastic products and deciding between them is really splitting hairs. While I'm sure you would respond a bit more strongly to one over the other, they are all quite good.

From what I think and have heard so far, the CLX puts you in a dilemna - just what is the best amp for them? The limitations of each are going to be readily audible. Fortunately, you'll get to try more than almost anyone else... but hopefully you'll be able to get beyond the "quite good" rating to at least "good"