MC performance listing

[Rafale]

From HiFi Critic, Martin Colloms performance listing

Preamplifier :

Conrad Johnson CT5 90
Conrad Johnson ART 57
Conrad Johnson ART II 68
Conrad Johnson ACT-2 (mkII) 105 (110)
Conrad Johnson Premier 7 36
Conrad Johnson 17 LS mkI 46
Conrad Johnson 17 LS -II 44
Conrad Johnson PV 14L 24
Conrad Johnson PF-R 22
Conrad Johnson Evolution 20 20
Conrad Johnson Motif (line) 23
Conrad Johnson Premier 16 49
Conrad Johnson Premier 14 39
Conrad Johnson Premier 16LS 49
Conrad Johnson Premier 18 28
Conrad Johnson Sonographe fet pre 15
Conrad Johnson 18LS 30
Conrad Johnson PV10 B 28 (line)

amplifier :

Conrad Johnson Premier 8a 38
Conrad Johnson MV125 18.5
Conrad Johnson MF 2300 22
Conrad Johnson MF 2500 22
Conrad Johnson MV55 23
Conrad Johnson Premier 140 35
Conrad Johnson LP70s 38
Conrad Johnson MV60se [EL34] 35
Conrad Johnson MV60se [6550] 40
Conrad Johnson Premier 350SA 110

gents let's discuss about this.....

[Joe Appierto]

From HiFi Critic, Martin Colloms performance listing

Preamplifier :

Conrad Johnson CT5 90
Conrad Johnson ART 57
Conrad Johnson ART II 68
Conrad Johnson ACT-2 (mkII) 105 (110)
Conrad Johnson Premier 7 36
Conrad Johnson 17 LS mkI 46
Conrad Johnson 17 LS -II 44
Conrad Johnson PV 14L 24
Conrad Johnson PF-R 22
Conrad Johnson Evolution 20 20
Conrad Johnson Motif (line) 23
Conrad Johnson Premier 16 49
Conrad Johnson Premier 14 39
Conrad Johnson Premier 16LS 49
Conrad Johnson Premier 18 28
Conrad Johnson Sonographe fet pre 15
Conrad Johnson 18LS 30
Conrad Johnson PV10 B 28 (line)

amplifier :

Conrad Johnson Premier 8a 38
Conrad Johnson MV125 18.5
Conrad Johnson MF 2300 22
Conrad Johnson MF 2500 22
Conrad Johnson MV55 23
Conrad Johnson Premier 140 35
Conrad Johnson LP70s 38
Conrad Johnson MV60se [EL34] 35
Conrad Johnson MV60se [6550] 40
Conrad Johnson Premier 350SA 110

gents let's discuss about this.....


Philippe,

I hope you don't mind, but I put the list in descending order just for ease of reading and discussion. I think I must have a touch of OCD.

Conrad Johnson ACT-2 mkII 110
Conrad Johnson ACT-2 105
Conrad Johnson CT5 90
Conrad Johnson ART II 68
Conrad Johnson ART 57
Conrad Johnson Premier 16 49
Conrad Johnson Premier 16LS 49
Conrad Johnson 17 LS mkI 46
Conrad Johnson 17 LS -II 44
Conrad Johnson Premier 14 39
Conrad Johnson Premier 7 36
Conrad Johnson 18LS 30
Conrad Johnson Premier 18 28
Conrad Johnson PV10 B (line) 28
Conrad Johnson PV 14L 24
Conrad Johnson Motif (line) 23
Conrad Johnson PF-R 22
Conrad Johnson Evolution 20 20
Conrad Johnson Sonographe fet pre 15



Conrad Johnson Premier 350SA 110
Conrad Johnson MV60se [6550] 40
Conrad Johnson Premier 8a 38
Conrad Johnson LP70s 38
Conrad Johnson Premier 140 35
Conrad Johnson MV60se [EL34] 35
Conrad Johnson MV55 23
Conrad Johnson MF 2300 22
Conrad Johnson MF 2500 22
Conrad Johnson MV125 18.5

Thanks,

[jimtranr]

The basis for his ratings is explained here:

HIFICRITIC, audio review magazine, hi fi critic (http://www.hificritic.com/colloms/ratings.aspx)

[rthomeint]

I am little confused by this listing. Did Martin Colloms listen to all these preamps and power amp recently or is the a cumulation of the CJ gear he's listened to over the past 20+ years. Some of the models on this list about 25 years old. I don't know how old this list but it's also interesting that there are no current models listed.

[turntable]

IMO, It is bs and a flawed list and a totally subjective number rating.

His system and speakers 20 years ago is very different to what he listens to now, let alone the changes over the past 20 years.

If he had all these cj items in his room currently and tested them on his so called performance measure that may make some sense.

At least Stereophile has the common sense of removing recommended components if the reviewer has not heard them recently in his system or they have changed.

cheers

[Rafale]

Thank you for your comments and corrections guys... this ranking... that is worth what that is worth....
Note that Prem350 obtains one of the highest mark awarded by MC for an amplifier

[turntable]

Thank you for your comments and corrections guys... this ranking... that is worth what that is worth....
Note that Prem350 obtains one of the highest mark awarded by MC for an amplifier

Hi Philippe

He has Krell on even higher scores :scratch2:

You owning the LP275's must be in musical heaven :music:

Like everything YMMV

cheers

[Briz Vegaas]

I felt pretty chuffed seeing my CT5 right up there amongst the best. Thats good enough for me. I had always been a bit disappointed when I saw this list bak in my Pv14ls2 days but I said to myself "mine is a s2 version, its better anyway".

Fact is its all subjective in review land.

[jimtranr]

Agreed that unless everything has been auditioned using the same associated equipment throughout the source-to-speaker chain, the rankings are at best what I'd call a "best guess."

One apparent oddity--and another source of my misgivings over the numeric assessments indicated--in the rankings is the bestowing of a slightly higher rating (46) to the first iteration of the Premier 17LS than to its Teflon-capped successor 17LSII (44). I have to wonder if MC listened to the latter (and direct-compared it to a plain-vanilla 17LS) after allowing the II's caps to complete their notoriously long burn-in cycle or auditioned it just after 100 or 200 hours of burn-in. Even if the rankings were reversed, a two-point spread on a scale that tops out at 150 strikes me as insignificant to the point of meaningless.

[rthomeint]

I just wonder when did he started this numerical rating system, in the early 90s when he wrote for Stereophile and HiFi News he didn't assign a number to a review. So did he go back read all those reviews he wrote and ranked equipment then? I find it had to believe he could remember how every piece of equipment he reviewed sounded over the years. What is the perfect score? and if that is reached is there then a new perfect score? ?

[jimtranr]

I just wonder when did he started this numerical rating system, in the early 90s when he wrote for Stereophile and HiFi News he didn't assign a number to a review. So did he go back read all those reviews he wrote and ranked equipment then? I find it had to believe he could remember how every piece of equipment he reviewed sounded over the years. What is the perfect score? and if that is reached is there then a new perfect score? ?

As indicated here--HIFICRITIC, audio review magazine, hi fi critic (http://www.hificritic.com/colloms/sound.aspx)--he started his ratings 25 years ago, using a 10-point scale. He adjusted the scale upward beginning about 10 years later to account for perceived technological improvements, and the scale now tops out at a presumed "perfect" of 150. Whether that constitutes "moving the goalposts" I leave up to you--as I do with the question of whether a component rated at 100 sounds "twice as good" as one bequeathed a 50.

[lotus340r]

I think he uses a fairly modest spec LP12/Aro which is rather alarming. A great fun deck for sure but hardly ideal for evaluating high resolution highend electronics.

That said, as an act2.2/350 owner im not disagreeing or anything. :)