JV's take on Ref5SE/Ref250 combo vs. CJ GAT/ART combo...

[Still-One]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

Cyril,
Great points and I agree with your perspective. I guess I just take exception to his statement that ARC is the marque to beat when it comes to tube preamps and amps...especially based on the glowing reviews the C-J ART/GAT combo received, which you remember and also asked JV about, and the fact that there are other tube manufacturers, e.g. Octave, that are doing terrific and innovative things that JV has never reviewed. One of the issues I have with TAS is they tend to review products from the same fairly small set of companies over and over again, rather than being broader in scope.

When's the last time you saw Octave gear reviewed in TAS? Or for that matter, Dynaudio?

It always seems to be Magico, Wilson, ARC, BAlabo, Wilson, Magico, Clearaudio, Soulution, Magico, PSB, and Wilson.

Stephen
What are you worried about what JV thinks about your gear as compared to something else? I think you remember how he gushed over the Magico gear at RMAF the last couple of years and most of us who heard it "there" thought it sounded very average, not very involving and bested my multiple rooms there. I question why they keep giving him good gear to review.

Jim

[cmalak]

Stephen/Jim...I place very little emphasis on reviewers' opinions about gear and pay attention largely to their description of what a piece of gear sounds like. That in combination with prior reviews I have read by the same reviewer and my auditions of said gear starts to give me a sense of whether how a reviewer describes gear matches up generally with what I hear when I audition the same gear. If it does, then I pay more attention to those reviewers for their descriptions which ultimately lets me narrow the field down to gear I might like to audition. Thare are a few reviewers whose sonic tastes coincide with mine (i.e., I have tended to like similar pieces that they have enthused about) and those reviewers I pay a little more attention to their opinions, but I am primarily interested in their description of what the equipment sounds like. The rest is superfluous and unimportant.

As for statements that item XYZ is the "best" or this is the "brand to beat," I find such statements comical.

[Puma Cat]

Originally Posted by Still-One

Stephen
What are you worried about what JV thinks about your gear as compared to something else? I think you remember how he gushed over the Magico gear at RMAF the last couple of years and most of us who heard it "there" thought it sounded very average, not very involving and bested my multiple rooms there. I question why they keep giving him good gear to review.

Jim

Jim,
Actually, not worried at all. What troubles me is that TAS and Valin tend to review a rather small selection of gear compared relative to what is out there, and that selection of Marques tends to get reviewed rather frequently. Then he make proclamations about whats best based on this selection of products. How could he say that ARC is the marque to beat when it comes to tubes if he's never reviewed Octave gear, for example? Or a Viva amp?

Another example: TAS reviews a Magico, Wilson, and PSB speaker at least once every year. OTOH, when's the last time you saw a review of an Audio Note, Evolution Acoustics, or Harbeth speaker?

[doggiehowser]

To be fair my friend is still waiting for his Evolution speakers which he ordered almost 2 years ago.

And Harbeths, AudioNote and Dynaudio aren't really US based so perhaps getting samples to them isn't as easy. You'll find that the UK publications are usually more Euro centric brands wise as well.

[Puma Cat]

Dynaudio has a major distribution and repair facility for North America located in Bensenville, IL. So, they about as US-based as any European company could be.

[doggiehowser]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

Dynaudio has a major distribution and repair facility for North America located in Bensenville, IL. So, they about as US-based as any European company could be.

I think when it comes to seeding gear to reviewers etc, there's still a difference when the bosses/top management team are close enough and know/trust the reviewer enough to ship a speaker system that costs more than most cars for months on end.

Not saying it doesn't happen. But I think regional proximity is probably why you see more US gear reviewed in US periodicals and European gear reviewed in UK periodicals

[BillK]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

Jim,
How could he say that ARC is the marque to beat when it comes to tubes if he's never reviewed Octave gear, for example? Or a Viva amp?

Another example: TAS reviews a Magico, Wilson, and PSB speaker at least once every year. OTOH, when's the last time you saw a review of an Audio Note, Evolution Acoustics, or Harbeth speaker?

There are a couple things here.

First, you can make that statement because it's true of a moment in time. If you had to hear everything, does that mean you'd also need to audition every Hong Kong tube amp to make the statement? To have had to audition NOS vs the ARC Sovteks?

Second, TAS is limited by which manufacturers send them equipment for review. Some do, some don't; you haven't seen a review of the latest Sony A/V receiver or Crown pro amp in TAS, either.

[Littlebunny]

Um, from my personal experience, professional reviewers have guided me wrong 100% of the time based on their written reviews. It started with reviewer 'X', and the Marantz 63SE CD player many years ago. The consensus of many (independent) reviewers helps more. The consensus of many 'Jane Doe' equipment owners is worth the most to me.

[ronenash]

Originally Posted by Littlebunny

The consensus of many (independent) reviewers helps more. The consensus of many 'Jane Doe' equipment owners is worth the most to me.

So very true

[Myles B. Astor]

Originally Posted by cmalak

Jonathan Valin of TAS had a preview blog on the Ref 250s here: Audio Research Reference 250 Monoblock Amplifier | The Absolute Sound

In the commentary section at the bottom of the blog, I asked him to compare the CJ GAT/ART combo which he reviewed so favorably earlier in the year with the Ref 5SE/Ref 250 combo (official reviews to come in the coming months) and here is his reply:



He pretty much thinks they are both at the top of their game. If push comes to shove and he was made to pick, he would go with the ARC combo by a smidgeon but to be fair he has been a long-time ARC fan. Hope this is an interesting read for folks.

I was especially interested to read that he found the ARC combo to be a bit more tonally dense/rich than the CJ combo because the ARC sound has traditionally been more about open, airy, 3 dimensional but somewhat lean sound whereas CJ gear has been known for its tonal richness but it seems that CJ and ARC's most current offerings have been converging in terms of sonic attributes.

Cyril:

Does JV say what he's using for a source? Analog? Digital? Both? And what cartridge?

The problem might very well be that JV is using the cj TEA1bc phono with the GAT/ART combo. While good, it's not up to some other phono stages out there, particularly if you're using a low output MC. I just don't find the TEA has enough gain for even a 0.5 mV cartridge (that's in part since the ART's input sensitivity is 1.8 V compared to the LM140Ms 0.5 V). The TEA is smooth, gets lots of space and harmonics but doesn't have the low end control nor the dynamics of say other phono sections I've had in house (Valvet, Doshi, Avid, Allnic).

Let me tell you the ART/GAT with 15 ips tape or analog doesn't lack for dynamics! With tape, you're constantly turning the volume up and down because the forte sections never seem to run out of steam (the same goes for the softer end of the musical spectrum).

Nor do I think the sounds are converging at all. While the cj is less burnished, it will never be mistaken for an ARC product.