Plinius amp and Conrad-Johnson 16LS


I'm thinking about changing my system back to Plinius SA-100 amps (mono blocks) and maybe using a Conrad-Johnson 16LS pre-amp. Has anyone had any experience with these two together? The Plinius I'm trying right now has such great pace and slam but is lacking in the final warmth a tube pre-amp might add. The Aloia gear I've been using is all equal to the Plinius just not as much of everything. The warmth and lack of electronic sound of the Aloia is more pleasing to my ear, if I could have both...
128x128jadem6
Thank-you Rayhall, excellant reply. I owned the SA-100 MK II for a couple years before going to the Aloia. I used a Kora Eclipse pre-amp. I had some major equipment failure with the plinius wich blew my Dunlavy III cross-overs and drivers along with the cd player. I have always wondered if it was my emotions or reality that I missed the Plinius. Now that I've had the chance to try a Plinius again I know it's the amp I like best of all I've heard. (I've listened to most) I am interested in your choice of CAT, what did you find between the CAT and CJ that makes you feel the CAT was better?
Redkiwi- I looked into the Placette as you suggest. Very interesting! From all the reviews I still am a bit lost as to the mid-range qualities. Have you had direct experience? As with the CAT it's hard to audition either without taking a leep of faith, even if I can return it. I'm assuming you were refering to using the RCA jacks and vertically bi-amping the Plinius rather than balanced and bridged mono-blocks. I plan to vertical amp and RCA. Why is it that bridged is not as good?
Another thought Rayhall, The Plinius SA102 has two power transformers each about 7 1/2" diam. vs the single in the SA-100This might help the bass and high end roll-off you sensed.
JD, the Placette has a very clean grainless mid that, if it has a coloration, it is an added sparkle - a slight golden glow.

The SA102 sounds much more like the SA250 than the SA100 III did - ie more liquid (less dry - whatever) and fuller, plus better extension at the extremes.

The balanced on the Plinius amps that I have taken apart, is not balanced at all. That is, the amp is not balanced - just the input. They use an IC (yuck) to handle the inversion, meaning when you use balanced you get the sound of an additional stage - that is executed by using a simple IC. You could probably deduce from this that Plinius believe in single-ended (RCA) and do not believe that making the amp fully balanced is worth it - and I would agree with them. Just don't waste your money on balanced interconnects. Listening to a Plinius amp and comparing RCA with balanced will prove this to you - more grit with balanced.

I am pretty sure the bridging involves the use of ICs on the input side too, but cannot say for certain.
I haven't yet heard a Plinius SA-102, Jadem6. So I don't know how the two transformers will affect the bass and treble extension. Has anyone A/B'd those two units for those characteristics? As far as the preamp shootout we did at a dealer, it was between the CAT, the Hovland and the CJ. The CAT was the smoothest and most balanced. The CAT emphasizes the deep bass through the mids. With this CAT in the store using stock tubes, the extreme highs were a little soft, but that can be improved with NOS tubes. Although the CAT does not sound rolled off in the highs, it doesn't give that sense of limitless high frequency extension which the Hovland can. The CAT has a beautifully integrated sound from the lowest lows through the mids. The CJ was much more emphasized on the mids, sounding to my ears rolled off at both extremes. It certainly was not anywhere near as capable in the deep bass as the CAT and it lacked that integration of low bass to mid bass to low mids etc. that, to me, makes a CAT so exceptional. The CJ had a nice remote and volume control which I wished the CAT has and the CAT has only two line inputs which are a pain, but IMO, just evaluated on sonics, there is no contest between those two. As far as the CAT and the Plinius together, most of the other CAT models are quite dynamic. The CAT Ultimate is still quite dynamic, but less so than other CAT models. Paired with the outrageous Plinius dynamics, the super clean Plinius midrange alongside the CAT which also spotlights the mids, you get great dynamics (Plinius characteristic) and super-clean sound (both Plinius and CAT characteristics) with terrific tonal layering (CAT) and musicality (CAT) in the frequency band where 80-85% of the music is. The CAT has more extension in the bass than the Plinius, so you don't give up anything there in the mating of the two. I think it is a match worth seeking out. I have heard good things about the Aloia preamp, with some saying it is as good or better than the CAT. A friend of mine feels that a very important match needs to be made between the preamp and the speakers and we didn't even talk about what speakers you are using. My feeling is that to get the most out of the CAT Plinius match, your speaker should also be a superb midrange reproducer.
Rayhall, that was an extremely well written and very helpful review. Thank-you, thank-you. My from end is Sony SCD-1 with full Audiocom modifications. The speakers are Dunlavy IVa, Walker high definition links, both up and down, Nordost Valhalla interconnects and I plan on changing my NBS Statement speaker cable with Valhalla. All equipment sits on EAR footers, on Nuance shelves, on an Apollo rigid steel rack. My power comes from dedicated circuits, the pre-amp and SACD player run through a Hydra conditioner.