Has anyone compared the CJ GAT or ET-5 to Audio Research Ref 5SE?

[audiojem]

I was wondering If any members have done an A-B on the following pre-amps
ET-5 vs GAT
GAT vs Audio Research Ref 5SE
ET-5 vs Ref 5SE
These are three units that I am Interested In buying, I know they are all over the price spectrum.
I've owned the GAT, sold it, miss it and might buy another but just wondered how close I might be able to get with the ET-5 or Ref 5SE?
Looking forward to your comments.
Thanks In Advance
AJ

[turntable]

Yes

The GAT is a LOT better than the REF 5SE.

I thought I would go balanced with my Dag amp so bought my dealers well burnt in Ref 5SE. What a disappointment.

In direct comparison with the GAT it had nice image height however the GAT was faster, direct, clearer, more musical, where the Ref 5SE just plodded in comparison - GAT - just better.

Lucky I had not sold my GAT, so sold the Ref 5SE after about 6 weeks.

[ronenash]

The GAT is a step above the ET5 in refinement bur the law of diminishing returns kicks in. Its definitely not twice as good as the ET5.

I have not heard the Ref5SE but a friend had one and after auditioning the ET5 he sold the Ref5SE and got the ET5.

[microstrip]

Originally Posted by audiojem

I was wondering If any members have done an A-B on the following pre-amps
ET-5 vs GAT
GAT vs Audio Research Ref 5SE
ET-5 vs Ref 5SE
These are three units that I am Interested In buying, I know they are all over the price spectrum.
I've owned the GAT, sold it, miss it and might buy another but just wondered how close I might be able to get with the ET-5 or Ref 5SE?
Looking forward to your comments.
Thanks In Advance
AJ

IMHO the choice will mainly depend on the amplifier you are considering.
And also IMHO both the GAT or the ARTS3 are a lot better than the ET-5.

[watchdog]

I know someone that owned both the Anniv 40 and the GAT. In his view, the GAT was far better than the Anniv 40.

[turntable]

Originally Posted by watchdog

I know someone that owned both the Anniv 40 and the GAT. In his view, the GAT was far better than the Anniv 40.

It would be no surprise if the GAT was overall better sounding than the Ref 10. cj have had a lot of experience in Teflon caps and how large and where to put them.

[dpham6761]

Really nice. Well done.
Cheers,
Resmas

[Masterlu]

dpham6761... Welcome to AA!

[Harlequin]

Originally Posted by watchdog

I know someone that owned both the Anniv 40 and the GAT. In his view, the GAT was far better than the Anniv 40.

Having spent time expeariencing both these excellent pre's in friends systems I am a little suprised by this comment ! As I found both had their own strengths in comparison with the other, and choice of one over the other would seem to me to be mainly whether one had a predilection for a slightly more forward projecting sound stage or not.

[Briz Vegaas]

Maybe you can clarify your preamp comparison process a little more.

Assuming that any two systems will vary a lot i would say its hard to attribute the sound to any individual component, unless you were swapping the preamps in and out.

In my system the sound character can be adjusted through simply adjusting resonance management and cable tension on my DAC. My point being that comparing different preamps in different systems, while tempting, is fraught with risk of attributing the sonics to just the preamp.

If i want air and a less forward sound from my system i make sure the stiff cables to my DAC are floppy and that my Nordost sort cones are free to work as intended. If the cables are more taught and the sort cones are constrained by the little soft wedge i have under my DAC ( used between listening sessions to stabilise the DAC and stop the cat from knocking it off its place on top of my rack) the sound is forward and with less air/ reverberation ( amongst other characteristics)

Different systems and rooms are bigger factors and would make any comparison of components really very hard to do reliably.