Comparing Ultraverve to CJ 16 or Supratek preamps

Nakolawala,
Can you tell me how do the sound of the modified UltraVerve compared to the stock one ? I'm interested to know the differences besides the remote control. Who knows, I might upgrade mine if I feel is a step up.

In general, the CJ pres are warm and lush sounding.

The ART and Premier 16LS broke that mold. In its day, the 16LS was considered a radical departure from the CJ house sound. While the last of the century tier 1 Premier models - and today's equivalents - remain on the yin side of imaginary neutral, its inaccurate to paint them with the same brush as decades old product (pre-1996). The CJ Premier 16, imo, was and remains best-of-breed at its price point.
 
Tim
 

I will soon be replacing my Ultraverve with a preamp built my me. I am using the Erno Borbely line stage and power supply in a custom chassis with P&G volume control.
My present Ultravere is fitted with the the Gold point step attenuator with remote control, the output caps replaced with Mundorf SIO and some resistor upgrades. Extensive tube rolling has been done for the 6sn7 type.
I have been comparing both the preamps side by side for the past two months and all I can say that the Borbely line stage is better in most areas. It is amazing that this SS preamp sounds so harmonically rich, smooth and non fatiguing with excellent control of bass, glorious midrange and sweet extended highs.
The Ultraverve is also fantastic, one of the great preamp out there, but this one is a step up.

Frankk,
From your previous thread, I believe you would gain the most from cables. I also have the Ultraverve and recently moved up the Gabriel Gold line to the Revelations. It is astonishing how good these cables are and very involving. If interested, contact Steve(STS) and see what he has coming up for sale. The Dehavilland is a keeper.

Well the responses are encouraging regarding keping the Ultraverve.
Actually mine has Vcap teflon caps in it (along with a few other tweaks) so it may or may not be better than the original. I might try to sub them out with some Mundorf Silver/Oil to see if I prefer them instead.

I have tried preamps with the 6922 and also 12XX7 tubes and they seemed sterile in comparison.

The fact that I have searched every forum to see if anyone has replaced their Ultraverve (and come up empty searching, which made me ask this question in the first place) maybe should make me just stop wondering and just enjoy it.

Yobby I do love tube rolling various NOS tubes with it and changing the sound. Also I like live like sound so if the CJ pre is like Oregon states I probably would find it boring after time.

I also have a DeHavilland UltraVerve. It replaced an Eastern Electric Minimax. I think the UltraVerve is the next level up, more transparent, sweeter and more dense images. The Minimax was faster with deeper bass. I would like to know how the UltraVerve compares against the BAT 31SE or higher.

In general, the CJ pres are warm and lush sounding. At first very seductive, but some people (me) can quickly tire of it. The CJ seems to have this syrup effect on most recordings. Some folks like it.
But I for one enjoy a more neutral sound, one that brings out lush if that's how it was recorded, or sharp attack, if that's how it was recorded.
The DeHavilland, which I've had in my system (along with a CJ 14) is much more revealing of the music as it was recorded- sparkle, warmth, clarity, bite, lush, etc. The CJ seems to me, one dimensional- lush.
I agree with Kbuzz, contact Kara. Ask her about tube rolling for the sound you miss, or are looking for. The DeHavilland has much more potential, IMO.

ive been curious why i have not seen dehavialland products for sale here either. Is it a small/limited product type brand or do folks just keep em?

If you like that amp, maybe you could talk to kara about trading up within their line as i think they make another model

Hi Frankk. Have you tried any tube rolling? Maybe the Ultraverve has some hidden magic in it. Good listening. Jeff