C-J PREMIER 17 LS SERIE 2 VS 16 LS SERIE 2

Absolutely - a Premier 16LS, series 1 or 2 will be a substantial upgrade. I lived with a 16LS series 1 for several years and used it with both Premier 12 mono-blocks and with the C-J Premier 140. The only thing that caused it to leave my system was the ACT2. Compared to the 17, the 16 offers better nuance, detailing, dimensionality, and low-end articulation. Previously I have described it as a preamp with soul.

The 16LS (1 or 2) goes farther toward timbrel neutrality than the 17. When you ask if will the you lose the relative sweetness of the 17, my experience says the 16 will give you a better idea of what the actual music sounds like. If the music is sweet, the 16LS will let that come through. It adds less artificial coloration than the 17. That said, the 16LS (either 1 or 2) remains on the yin side of neutral. Compared to, for example, the ART or ACT2, you realize the 16 is tonally slightly darker/warmer.

I had the opportunity to buy a brand new 17 at a *very* attractive price. It is a wonderful preamp. But I held out until I could afford a 16. In no way am I knocking the 17. But in today's used market the price differential makes a compelling case for the 16.

The Premier 16LS loves good NOS tubes. I had luck with mid-60's to early 70's Amperex 6DJ8s and 7308s as well as Valvo branded Amperexes (Amperexi?). Telefunkens work well too. Siemens are fine, but my ears were never satisfied with more than one Siemens per channel; two or three were a bit too lean and upward tilted.

In your 12s try the Sylvania 6CG7 or RCA clear top 6FQ7 phase splitters in conjunction with a GE or RCA triple mica 5751. The small tubes can make as much difference as the power tubes. I preferred the GE6550A power tubes with which the amp was originally voiced, versus say the Svet 6550C (which do sound better in the 140).

Cheers,
Tim

Hey Shane - Thanks. I bought the PH7. I don't know if it has the gain for an XV-1, but its worth a listen. Works really well with the Orpheus. Biggest diff from the XOno was less grain, more detail and really excellent harmonics - and yeah it is quiet. Got a huge power supply. But not as flexible for gain or loading which some folks need.

Wrt C-J gear and Teflon caps, they do make a significant difference and C-J has adopted their use for their upper echelon pieces. In my opinion a Premier 16 with or without Teflon caps is still a league beyond any version of the 17LS, even as good as that preamp is. Or put differently, the 16LS is closer in sound to the ART than to the 17LS.

I'll agree with danthemannn that if you can afford a CT-5 (around $7.5k iirc), it is certainly worth a listen. To look beyond that level would, imo, mean taking a serious look at your amps. I loved the Premier 12s, but they are definitely closer to the s/lush warmth of older CJ gear and through them you won't benefit from what a top-tier preamp (like the ACT2 or REF3) brings to the table in terms of micro-dynamics and superior timing. If you plan to hang on to the 12s for a while, a used 16 may be a better value. Just my opinion.

At $25k each only 25 ART IIIs will be made. I think it is largely a commemorative piece to celebrate C-J's thirty years in business. I haven't seen the inside of one, but my guess is that CJ uses some of the newer componentry in the ART III that they are using in the ACT2.2. The ART III may turn mythic on us if we never see a formal review - which we may not. That it could be $10k better than the ACT2.2 is hard for me to imagine. But its the high-end so logic and proportion go down the rabbit hole. ;-)

Cheers,
Tim