New CJ amps - LP125sa

[ronenash]

Just heard that CJ will be coming out with a stereo version of the LP125 called LP125sa. This model will replace the current LP125m mono-blocks in the CJ lineup. Apparently CJ are bringing this model out to save costs. The new model will be sold at 15% lower price than the mono-blocks. In addition to the LP125sa there will be a LP125sa+ which will offer Teflon capacitors and better resistors and parts throughout. This will be the equivalent of the LP125mSE.

With this change in the CJ lineup the only tube mono-blocks available from CJ are the ART mono-blocks.

For those interested in the LP125m mono-blocks, better get them while they are available.

[joeinid]

Thanks Ron. Wow, big changes.

[Littlebunny]

Apparently CJ are bringing this model out to save costs.

I admit to being Mr. Paranoid, but I have a funny [sinking] feeling w.r.t. CJ of late. :tears:

I'll take my pills now.

[Littlebunny]

I'm also determined to hit 100 posts of irrelevance today too.

[Briz Vegaas]

Where did I hear that story about the boat building company who were asked about their strategy for dealing with the GFC. Simple, they said, we will just stop making the smaller ones.

[Littlebunny]

:dazed: :D

[Littlebunny]

two....

[Littlebunny]

100

Thank God. Now I can retire.

[Joe Appierto]

You guys are making me feel really old. That's two posts in the same thread where I had to look up what you were saying in my handy-dandy Internet Slang words - Internet Dictionary - InternetSlang.com (http://www.internetslang.com/).

Maybe I should get out more. :yes:

[ronenash]

Joe, I still have no idea what they were talking about. Maybe I will catch up one day... :)

[Rayooo]

But where would we be as a civilization without TLA's ?

Now back to your regularly scheduled program:

What valve was that again.....? :scratch2:

[Joe Appierto]

But where would we be as a civilization without TLA's ?

Now back to your regularly scheduled program:

What valve was that again.....? :scratch2:

LOL

Good one.

[turntable]

Surely a stereo version of the lp125 is closer to the prem140 with 8 output tubes?

Or will cj put 6 × kt120's on one chassis?

What that does mean is that there will be a monoblock available if this happens.

Funny, ARC don't seem to have any problems marketing/selling vs115 stereo amps as well as the premium ref 150.

I think rationalizing like this as sense if cj can make a normal and premium stereo tube amp, as that was known to be their reference gear. Currently I believe the lp range in general is looked upon as their cheaper range with no premium gear outside of the art. The se does not distinguish itself from the general lp range as they look the same.


Business wise, believe cj need to resurrect the premier range again.

If they are reducing overall models, well hmmmm.

[Joe Appierto]

Surely a stereo version of the lp125 is closer to the prem140 with 8 output tubes?

Or will cj put 6 × kt120's on one chassis?

What that does mean is that there will be a monoblock available if this happens.

Funny, ARC don't seem to have any problems marketing/selling vs115 stereo amps as well as the premium ref 150.

I think rationalizing like this as sense if cj can make a normal and premium stereo tube amp, as that was known to be their reference gear. Currently I believe the lp range in general is looked upon as their cheaper range with no premium gear outside of the art. The se does not distinguish itself from the general lp range as they look the same.


Business wise, believe cj need to resurrect the premier range again.

If they are reducing overall models, well hmmmm.

As far as I know, c-j only makes push-pull amplifiers, so they've gone (according to their web site) with two pairs of KT120s per channel and they're rating it at 125 wpc. They're also using a 6189 as the input tube and a pair of 6922s for the phase inverters.

I also find it interesting that the Premier line has been retired. Their anniversary models seem to have taken their place in the preamplifier line but I'm not sure what their thinking is with the amplifiers below the ART flagship.

:scratch2:

[Puma Cat]

I admit to being Mr. Paranoid, but I have a funny [sinking] feeling w.r.t. CJ of late. :tears:

I'll take my pills now.

I wouldn't worry about C-J, they are a very small company of only about 17 employees....I'm sure they sell enough product every year that staying in business is not a problem. They have to stay relevant business-wise, and the advent of the KT-120 is a boon for them. They can make a very high quality stereo amp using two KT-120s per side that puts out what a pair of LP125M monos can put out using 6550s, and my guess is that if they optimize the transformer design and circuit topology for the KT-120, the stereo amp could perform sonically as good as or superior to 6550-based monoblocks because the KT-120 is sonically superior to 6550s (I have absolutely no doubt about that).

So, it makes sense from a business and customer perspective; they can make one box that earns 85% of the revenue of two boxes (with less than 50% of the COGS), and sell more boxes overall because more customers scan accomodate a less expensive single box than two more expensive boxes (I for one, don't have room for monoblocks, for example). The customer wins because they get a single chassis that has the power output and sonic quality previously obtainable with only monoblocks at less cost.

[Joe Appierto]

I wouldn't worry about C-J, they are a very small company of only about 17 employees....I'm sure they sell enough product every year that staying in business is not a problem. They have to stay relevant business-wise, and the advent of the KT-120 is a boon for them. They can make a very high quality stereo amp using two KT-120s per side that puts out what a pair of LP125M monos can put out using 6550s, and my guess is that if they optimize the transformer design and circuit topology for the KT-120, the stereo amp could perform sonically as good as or superior to 6550-based monoblocks because the KT-120 is sonically superior to 6550s (I have absolutely no doubt about that).

So, it makes sense from a business and customer perspective; they can make one box that earns 85% of the revenue of two boxes (with less than 50% of the COGS), and sell more boxes overall because more customers scan accomodate a less expensive single box than two more expensive boxes (I for one, don't have room for monoblocks, for example). The customer wins because they get a single chassis that has the power output and sonic quality previously obtainable with only monoblocks at less cost.


Hi Steve,

They could do exactly what you're saying by using the full plate dissipation of the KT120. But, from what their web site relates, they've gone the more conservative route and are using two pairs of output tubes per channel and not a single pair. This should result in a longer life expectancy for the tubes, I'd imagine.

Regards,

[Puma Cat]

Hi Steve,

They could do exactly what you're saying by using the full plate dissipation of the KT120. But, from what their web site relates, they've gone the more conservative route and are using two pairs of output tubes per channel and not a single pair. This should result in a longer life expectancy for the tubes, I'd imagine.

Regards,

The new design is on their website?

Well, what you say, Joe, does not surprise me, one of the top requirements for C-J has always been tube reliability. Either way, they are building only one box to do the job of two, This means they are selling one box for the same effective performance specs for almost the same revenue as two, and still save at least 50% on COGS (I'm sure they've got this all worked out with regards to the finanical model as both are PhD economists by training); this means the LP125SA should be more profitable for them. The key thing is that a KT-120 sonically outperforms a 6550 so they will likely be able to match or exceed the sonic performance of the LP125Ms using 6550s...

[Joe Appierto]

The new design is on their website?

Well, what you say, Joe, does not surprise me, one of the top requirements for C-J has always been tube reliability. Either way, they are building only one box to do the job of two, This means they are selling one box for the same effective performance specs for almost the same revenue as two, and still save at least 50% on COGS (I'm sure they've got this all worked out with regards to the finanical model as both are PhD economists by training); this means the LP125SA should be more profitable for them. The key thing is that a KT-120 sonically outperforms a 6550 so they will likely be able to match or exceed the sonic performance of the LP125Ms using 6550s...

Yes, this is the entry for it:

LP125sa Vacuum-Tube Stereo Power Amplifier
http://www.conrad-johnson.com/It_just_sounds_right/images_current_products/LP125sa.jpg

The latest in the highly regarded series of conrad-johnson vacuum-tube power amplifiers, the LP125sa represents a compelling combination of the audio excellence one expects from conrad-johnson, the convenience of a single stereo chassis, and, at 125 watts per channel, sufficient power for the majority of high-end speaker systems. This is an amplifier capable of capturing the delicate textures and subtle nuances of live music while maintaining control with the authority that comes with ample power.

The LP125sa audio circuit consists of three stages. The input signal is amplified by a single-ended triode amplifier designed for wide bandwidth. The signal is then direct coupled to a cathode coupled phase-inverter. This high current, triode phase-inverter stage provides a balanced, low impedance drive to the output stage. Output power is developed by two pairs of KT120s per channel, chosen for their excellent sonic character, high power, and reliability. The output tubes are operated in ultralinear configuration which offers a desirable combination of high power and low distortion. Massive output transformers with intricately interleaved windings afford extended bandpass and high phase linearity. A small amount (about 12 dB) of loop negative feedback reduces distortion and achieves a sufficiently high damping factor to control reactive loudspeaker systems.

Power supply design is every bit as critical to the performance of an audio component as the audio circuit itself. In the LP125sa, separate, low impedance, discrete dc power supply regulators are provided for the input and phase-inverter stages, preventing the output stage from modulating these stages through the power supply.

These amplifiers require no complicated adjustments or specialized equipment to maintain. To assure continued peak performance, the owner need only make a simple bias adjustment when new tubes are installed. Built in LED bias indicators allow the user to make this adjustment using only the supplied screwdriver.

http://www.conrad-johnson.com/It_just_sounds_right/images_current_products/LP125sa_front.jpg



At conrad-johnson we are keenly aware that component parts contribute importantly to the sonic performance of any circuit design. As expected for conrad-johnson products, the LP125sa amplifier sets uncommonly high quality standards. Resistors are precision metal film types. All audio-circuit capacitors, as well as all capacitors in the regulated power supplies are polypropylene and polystyrene. Proprietary wide-bandwidth output transformers contribute to excellent high frequency performance. Even the gold plated connectors and the internal wiring have been carefully selected for optimal sonic performance. The LP125sa offers fine tube performance that ìjust sounds rightî. Those who wish to take the experience a step further will want to investigate the upgraded LP125sa+ which incorporates CJD Teflon Capacitors and ultra high-performance metal foil resistors in strategic applications in the circuit. Either model is sure to rekindle your passion for enjoying great music in your home.

Specifications:

Power: 125 watts per channel from 30 Hz to 15 KHz at no more than 1.5 % THD or IMD, both channels driven into 4 ohms (also available connected for 8 or 16 ohm loads)
Sensitivity: 1.1 volt rms to rated power
Frequency Response (at 10 watts):20 Hz to 20 kHz, +/- .1 dB
Hum and Noise: 104 dB below rated power
Input Impedance: 100 kOhms
Tube Complement: 1 6189, 2 6922, 8 KT120
Dimensions: 19D x 19W x 8H
Weight: XX Lb

Each conrad-johnson component is patiently and carefully hand assembled, then individually inspected and its performance verified by an experienced audio technician. Our confidence in these components is reflected in the three year limited warranty covering labor and parts except vacuum tubes. Service is a top priority at conrad-johnson. In the event that a product does require service, it will be handled promptly and efficiently.
C O P Y R I G H T © 1 9 9 8 -- 2 0 1 2 c o n r a d j o h n s o n
conrad-johnson design, inc. 2733 Merrilee Drive Fairfax, VA 22031 phone: 703-698-8581, fax: 703-560-5360

[Puma Cat]

Thanks, Joe, I'm sure many of the C-J owners here will find this of interest.

Cheers,
Stephen

[joeinid]

Thanks, Joe, I'm sure many of the C-J owners here will find this of interest.

Cheers,
Stephen

+1 Thanks!

[turntable]

The lp125sa is the same size chassis as an Art/prem8/lp275. It is not related to the lp125m, which is 2x lp66's.
Surely they could have called it a lp150 to differentiate it.

IMO, just adds to the confusing naming conventions.

BTW, I am not totally convinced of the total superiority of the kt120's over all 6550's. The tung Sol 6550's are pretty damm good and show superior upper frequency speed and transparency and a nimbleness the kt120 cannot match. The kt120 is more effortless in its overall presentation with better bass weight.

[Joe Appierto]

The lp125sa is the same size chassis as an Art/prem8/lp275. It is not related to the lp125m, which is 2x lp66's.
Surely they could have called it a lp150 to differentiate it.

IMO, just adds to the confusing naming conventions.

BTW, I am not totally convinced of the total superiority of the kt120's over all 6550's. The tung Sol 6550's are pretty damm good and show superior upper frequency speed and transparency and a nimbleness the kt120 cannot match. The kt120 is more effortless in its overall presentation with better bass weight.

That's pretty much how I feel, too, about their differences. However, I did just order another KT120 to replace the one that won't bias anymore. I'm curious how they'll sound in the Premier 140 now that it's the new and improved version. :music:

Meanwhile, I continue to be surprised by how good the SED =C= 6550C sound that I'm using in the 140 currently. Go figure.

[Myles B. Astor]

As far as I know, c-j only makes push-pull amplifiers, so they've gone (according to their web site) with two pairs of KT120s per channel and they're rating it at 125 wpc. They're also using a 6189 as the input tube and a pair of 6922s for the phase inverters.

I also find it interesting that the Premier line has been retired. Their anniversary models seem to have taken their place in the preamplifier line but I'm not sure what their thinking is with the amplifiers below the ART flagship.

:scratch2:

Though it never came to fruition, Lew and Bill did experiment with SE amps several years ago.

The big question and mystery surrounding cj though is what became of the much talked about GAT amp?

And it might be silly but owning the ART amp and hearing the difference between it and the LP140Ms, what would a 500 wpc cj amp sound like? That is speaking as an audiophile and not reviewer. ;)

[Myles B. Astor]

Hi Steve,

They could do exactly what you're saying by using the full plate dissipation of the KT120. But, from what their web site relates, they've gone the more conservative route and are using two pairs of output tubes per channel and not a single pair. This should result in a longer life expectancy for the tubes, I'd imagine.

Regards,

That was Lew's response when I asked him that question at CES. Cj is really about reliability.

[Puma Cat]

That was Lew's response when I asked him that question at CES. Cj is really about reliability.

Yup.

[ronenash]

I wouldn't worry about C-J, they are a very small company of only about 17 employees....I'm sure they sell enough product every year that staying in business is not a problem. They have to stay relevant business-wise, and the advent of the KT-120 is a boon for them. They can make a very high quality stereo amp using two KT-120s per side that puts out what a pair of LP125M monos can put out using 6550s, and my guess is that if they optimize the transformer design and circuit topology for the KT-120, the stereo amp could perform sonically as good as or superior to 6550-based monoblocks because the KT-120 is sonically superior to 6550s (I have absolutely no doubt about that).

So, it makes sense from a business and customer perspective; they can make one box that earns 85% of the revenue of two boxes (with less than 50% of the COGS), and sell more boxes overall because more customers scan accomodate a less expensive single box than two more expensive boxes (I for one, don't have room for monoblocks, for example). The customer wins because they get a single chassis that has the power output and sonic quality previously obtainable with only monoblocks at less cost.

That is not what the LP125sa is about as far as I know. It will be like the Pr140 using 8 valves, 4 per channel.

[ronenash]

The lp125sa is the same size chassis as an Art/prem8/lp275. It is not related to the lp125m, which is 2x lp66's.
Surely they could have called it a lp150 to differentiate it.

IMO, just adds to the confusing naming conventions.

BTW, I am not totally convinced of the total superiority of the kt120's over all 6550's. The tung Sol 6550's are pretty damm good and show superior upper frequency speed and transparency and a nimbleness the kt120 cannot match. The kt120 is more effortless in its overall presentation with better bass weight.

In size yes, but functionally the circuit is identical to the lp125 and just combines the two mono blocks into a single chassis.

[ronenash]

That was Lew's response when I asked him that question at CES. Cj is really about reliability.

All I can say is that I have had many CJ components over the years and not a single one of them failed.

Ho, just remembered my pv10 needed a replacement of the timer for the startup muting circuit after 10years of service.

My current LP125mSE have worked without a hickup for a year now and tube bias is as stable as can be :music:

[Puma Cat]

Ron,
How is the ACT2 working out?

[ronenash]

Ron,
How is the ACT2 working out?

Working amazingly well. Last weekend I swapped the ET3SE back into the system to see how consistent my initial experience is and although I loved the ET3SE the ACT2 is in a different league altogether.
Everything sounds more like live music, this is the best I can describe it. With the ACT2 driving either the CA200 or the LP125mSE I can sit and listen to music for hours.

I am really happy :banana:

[rthomeint]

I wonder can the 6550 be substituted for the KT120 in the LP125SA and the ARTSA? Since these designed from the ground up to use KT120s are the issues with substitutions.

[ronenash]

I wonder can the 6550 be substituted for the KT120 in the LP125SA and the ARTSA? Since these designed from the ground up to use KT120s are the issues with substitutions.

Sure Rob, 6550 work perfectly well in CJ amps. Which 6550 are you thinking of? I think the KT120 should prove to be finer sounding.

[turntable]

I wonder can the 6550 be substituted for the KT120 in the LP125SA and the ARTSA? Since these designed from the ground up to use KT120s are the issues with substitutions.

Go for the Tung Sol 6550's for a nice alternative to the KT120's. Faster and more precise in the highs and upper mids. Less bass weight and effortless v the KT120's.

nice to have both.:thumbsup:

[Littlebunny]

Anybody clued in on how much the new 125sa might cost? I wasn't too keen on buying a Classic 60.

I didn't realise CJ was such a small company. I'm glad they're financially 'stable', especially considering that I'm now a customer!

[rthomeint]

Anybody clued in on how much the new 125sa might cost? I wasn't too keen on buying a Classic 60.

I didn't realise CJ was such a small company. I'm glad they're financially 'stable', especially considering that I'm now a customer!


Well if it's 15% less that the mono blocks like Ron said, then it would be about $8200.00.

[Myles B. Astor]

Anybody clued in on how much the new 125sa might cost? I wasn't too keen on buying a Classic 60.

I didn't realise CJ was such a small company. I'm glad they're financially 'stable', especially considering that I'm now a customer!

I think the number of "small" high-end companies trumps the number of "large" high-end audio manufacturers. In fact, you can count the number of "large" manufacturers on one, possibly two hands?

Harman/Levinson/Revel
Krell (at their peak, probably employed around 300 people but that number has dwindled)
Wilson
?

[rthomeint]

Anybody clued in on how much the new 125sa might cost? I wasn't too keen on buying a Classic 60.

I didn't realise CJ was such a small company. I'm glad they're financially 'stable', especially considering that I'm now a customer!

That's one of the reasons I buy their products. I have owned good amount of equipment from companies that are no longer in business. It's no fun trying to get a piece of equipment serviced when the company is gone.

[ronenash]

Well if it's 15% less that the mono blocks like Ron said, then it would be about $8200.00.

That's the price I heard.