CJ Premier 140 and 6550 Tung-Sol reissue

[aldinohiend]

http://www.videohifi.com/blogs/aldinohiend/6550-tung-sol-replica/view

6550 TUNG-SOL replica (seconda parte) (http://www.videohifi.com/blogs/aldinohiend/6550-tung-sol-replica-%28seconda%20parte%29/view)

http://www.videohifi.com/blogs/aldinohiend/6550-tung-sol-replica-3/view

[Coppy]

Is it just me?

[turntable]

I agree, the Tung Sol reissue tubes are superb and my favourite tube with my prem 8a's.

[Joe Appierto]

I just had the Premier 140 going for the last two weeks using the CA200 as a preamp. Originally had SED =C= 6550C running when I plugged the 140 back in and thought it sounded really good. Then switched them out for reissue T-S 6550 and was even happier. They really are excellent IMHO.

[turntable]

Don't sell the 140 Joe :yes:

[Joe Appierto]

Don't sell the 140 Joe :yes:

I really do like it, especially since the caps upgrade. It's a keeper. :music:

I did have it up for sale for a month or so but I may have had it priced too high and there didn't seem to be much interest. Maybe in retrospect, that was a good thing.

[Joe Appierto]

http://www.videohifi.com/blogs/aldinohiend/6550-tung-sol-replica/view

6550 TUNG-SOL replica (seconda parte) (http://www.videohifi.com/blogs/aldinohiend/6550-tung-sol-replica-%28seconda%20parte%29/view)

6550 TUNG-SOL replica (terza parte) (http://www.videohifi.com/blogs/aldinohiend/6550-tung-sol-replica-3/view)

Ciao Aldo,

I just read through your reviews of the New Sensor Tung-Sol 6550 and thoroughly enjoyed them. It's also one of my favorite output tubes in the Premier 140.

The translation program my computer uses didn't render a perfect translation, so I'm not sure if I understood a comment you may have made. The Premier 140 was the first, as far as I know, c-j amplifier to have been designed and voiced using all Russian tubes. It came stock with SED =C= 6550C output tubes and not GE 6550A tubes that c-j had been using in previous models such as the Premier 8, 11 and 12.

Anyway, thanks for the links, the reviews were thoughtful and thought provoking.

Regards,

[aldinohiend]

Hello Joe, from my information the Premier 140 was originally designed for the 6550 GE. Due to the availability on the market has been adapted to the 6550 Winged "C", good valves but absolutely unsuitable to the seductive sounds of CJ. Much, much better the 6550 Tung-Sol reissue. Please note that, taking advantage of the excellent price, I bought 5 octets!

[turntable]

Afraid Not Aldinhiend :D


The 140 is the first Premier amp voiced from scratch with an all-Russian tube lineup. An obvious rationale is that the Svetlana 6550C is in production and available, while the GE 6550A -- C-J’s power tube of choice for the predecessor Premier Eight and Twelve -- is not. Sonically, the 6550C is known for tighter bass, superior resolution, and grainless, extended highs. Implementation based on listening is key to avoid the Svetlana sounding lean and mechanical.

SoundStage! Equipment Review - Conrad-Johnson Premier 140 Stereo Amplifier (2/2004) (http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/conradjohnson_premier140.htm)

Lew Johnson has confirmed this to me as well

all the best

[Myles B. Astor]

But was the decision made by necessity or choice? Me thinks the former.

[Briz Vegaas]

I just had the Premier 140 going for the last two weeks using the CA200 as a preamp. Originally had SED =C= 6550C running when I plugged the 140 back in and thought it sounded really good. Then switched them out for reissue T-S 6550 and was even happier. They really are excellent IMHO.

Actually the pre part in the CA200 is its weakest link. I have been running an digital volume control ( Weiss INT202) with theatre bypass since my CT5 had its little dancing relay problem and its significantly better than the CA200s chip based ladder attenuator. The noise floor drops considerably by bypassing the in built volume control.

I would be interested to hear if anyone else has tried this

CT5 comes home today finally.

Bit off topic, sorry.

[Joe Appierto]

Actually the pre part in the CA200 is its weakest link.

I happen to agree with you. I think the CA200 works better standalone than as a preamp. Haven't tried a good preamp feeding it , but I have a feeling that would be a better match-up than vice-versa.