CAT Preamps vs Amps

Gvatchna, Robertje and Strapper211,

Thanks for your responses. Since I am a very new owner of their Ultimate preamp, it is good to hear that based on your long-term experiences the CAT preamp is on par with their amps and that they are the best match. It seems that those who would disagree maybe having a mismatch elsewhere in their systems. Strapper's opinion is very informative since it is based on the evaluation of some very high-end brands/models and felt the CAT pre was still the best.

Thanks again. Let's see if we get some opposing views :)

no opposing view from my side. I've got an earlier version of the CAT SL1 - the Signature Mk3. This is also a simply excellent preamp, if I may say so.

if you look @ the development @ CAT, you'll notice that the preamp came 1st way back in 1986. There was no power amp @ that time. So, the SL1 has been refined over nearly 20 years to this day! I'm inclined to believe that the CAT preamp is just as musical, transparent, dynamic, etc, etc as their power amps. the CAT gear serves up music without any sugar coating & is one of the few pieces of gear that tries very hard to be true to the recorded playback medium. often I've read people chosing to stick w/ the CAT power amp & give up the preamp, if they have both, on the notion or observation or both that a CAT pre & power might be too much of a good thing in that both pieces are exacting in their sound hence together they would render the music in a too dry manner. Well, it's a personal choice - one man's 'too dry' music might be another's 'just right' music. Admittedly some/many people like their music coloured. So be it! So, it doesn't matter what these other people think of CAT preamps & what they chose to use in lieu. However, it's important to exactly note (when such info is offered/posted) why they opted to use another preamp & see if those criteria exist in your system as well &/or you have a very similar music-delivery taste. If so, you might be better off talking one-one w/ that member &/or trying that other preamp in your system. In the end, of course, select what's right for your system & your ear. It's a system built to suit your needs & not the critics'. FWIW. IMHO. YMMV.

I am both a CAT SL-1 Ultimate Mk I owner and a First Sound Presence Deluxe Mk II 4.0 owner. I love my CAT, which I have had about 4 years, but I also love my First Sound. The CAT has unbelievably great bass, both deep and powerful, a smooth, sweet, lush midrange and detailed, extended highs. To those who think it is lean or bright, and I have heard some claim this on Audiogon, I just cannot figure it out. I would think it is a job to make the CAT sound bright. That is just not one of its problems, particularly with the right tubes. Although the F.S. sounds different, a little quieter and is a little more transparent, if you are a new CAT owner you can be assured that you are hearing the top echelon of preamps made. You can find different and maybe as good, depending on your taste and what matches your equipment best, but without taking into consideration your taste and the other equipment you have, you have one of the best preamps made without a doubt.

Ok ok, I’ll chime in. Aoliviero’s last statement was just too tempting to resist. There’s been so much written in this thread that I want to address. So I’ll stir up the pot here a bit which I do regularly anyway. 8-)

I have owned the JL-3 Signatures for 8 months now. The first few months I was still using the BAT 31SE line stage. But the last 4+ months I have been using the Aesthetix Callisto Signature. The phono stage for 2+ years has been the Aesthetix Io.

For many months I have wanted to try the CAT preamp in my home system. A couple of times almost panned out but the units were sold before I had a chance. I will still continue to try and find a way to hear either the Ultimate or the upcoming Legend, as either a line stage or preferably a full function preamp.

If there is indeed a “house” sound with CAT products, adding a CAT preamp with the JL-3’s would most likely be too much in one direction for me. It’s not a matter of too much of a “good” thing but perhaps rather too much emphasis by a designer to achieve a set of goals and other areas not getting as much attention. Assembling a system is all about achieving a balance of extension and control at the frequency extremes, low noise floor and low-level resolution, tonal coherency and dynamic contrasts to portrayal of space, decays, harmonic overtones, etc. Has anyone out there heard one product which redefines the state of the art in every one of these categories?

I have no doubt that Strapper211’s system sounds phenomenal. But I have no idea what is meant by the CAT preamp being the “best match” vs. the other preamps he auditioned or owned. A little more detail as to exactly the benefits, or simply tonally or dimensional differences, would be of great value to the reader.

On the issue of lean, this is ultimately defined a bit differently by each of us. When I heard the CAT JL-2 amp vs. the Atmasphere MA1’s, I felt the JL-2 was indeed lean! The MA1’s were more full and rich in the lower mids. And this I loved. Were they more accurate or less so? Who cares! And yet, the CAT had an awesome dynamic contrast, see through quality and initial attack that impressed me so greatly. But again, was this a more accurate rendition of the real thing? With all the processing of our LPs and CDs through the recording and manufacturing process, how will we ever know what is accurate or neutral to know how the sound was at the day of the recording? We get so wrapped up on the silly terminology when the focus really is whether or not that each component and ultimately the assembled system gets us one step closer to the real event in our own mind.

The strengths described of the CAT amp above are what drew me to purchasing CAT amps. But in the back of my mind, I wanted that fullness and presence in the vocals that was so impressively portrayed by the Atmasphere amps. For me, the Aesthetix products were a perfect match at the system level. As two local (Minneapolis) audiophiles (Jadem6 and Artg) can attest, the combination of the Aesthetix Jupiter models with the JL-3s driving Sound Lab A1’s with the Clearaudio Ref TT as source is nothing short of phenomenal.

The Aesthetix products are incredible in the areas of 3-dimensionality. They piano notes and decays beautifully. It only takes one trip upstairs to hit a piano note and take notice that the Aesthetix get it right. So very few line stages or preamps, solid state or tube, do this accurately. And I have no wanting of bass as JD and I have both been overwhelmed with the Callisto handling the low end like no tube preamp either of us has auditioned in our systems. And there is a wonderful openness and extension in the trebles as well that my previous BAT 31SE and ARC LS5 II/III did not even come close to approaching.

I will go out on a limb and predict that the CAT preamps may indeed have a lower noise floor and possibly a greater degree of low-level resolution than the Aesthetix. But I highly doubt the CAT will portray the volume of space and decays anything close to the Aesthetix. And this to me alone is worth the price of admission. Once you hear the piano or a guitarist occupying space on the stage with the Aesthetix, you know something is right. Is having this quality a coloration? If it is, sign me up.

Each of us is chasing a system sound that fits our own set of priorities. The two local audiophiles I mentioned above have very different systems than mine and yet when I have gone to their home, the sound has been so incredible. I hear things there that I do not hear at my home and vice versa. To gain in one area often results in a loss in another. But I would never characterize their systems as being “mismatched” or too lean or fat, or colored, or whatever. There is no absolute here contrary to the claims by many magazine reviewers.

When I do finally get a chance to try out a CAT preamp here, and if I prefer the Aesthetix models or the upcoming full function Aria preamp, it will not be because my system has a problem elsewhere! For someone to say this is due to a system mismatch or problem is ridiculous. And because I preferred another preamp over the CAT here, and thus disagreed with other posts here, for this to imply my system was mismatched again would be ridiculous.

It’s not a matter of one product working in a system or not, or my system having a problem elsewhere but rather how closely the end system result matches what I want from a system. And for those who are convinced that one product is more “neutral” or “transparent”, yada yada yada, over another, well that’s fine. But there’s a lot more going on in the music that many such people never experience until they hear the likes of the Aesthetix Jupiter products. And again, with the CAT amps, this is awesome.

I think anyone who buys one product simply because they already have products by that same company, and they dismiss other competing products is only cheating themselves. There are simply far too many impressive products out there that deserve our time rather than to dismiss solely on the basis of who’s the manufacturer.

And if you have not already realized it, I think Ken Stevens has the most impressive amps by quite a stretch. Only time will tell if his preamp captures my attention the same way. But for now, the sound I have is mighty fine.

John

Yes, it's a very good pre, esp on line. In particular, it manages to convey dynamic contrast and an impression of "speed" (low frequency energy is good).

As to system "synergy", the CAT drives difficult loads easily and well -- so I wouldn't worry about electrical mismatches.

This said, I preferred the (older model) big Lamm -- except for the dynamics.

Unlike most respondents, I don't own one.