Anyone compare the Lamm L1 ro LL2 to the CJ LS16?

Totally different sounds. The LAMM preamps are more to the neutral side and the CJ on the very lush and tubey side.

Come now, Jtinn. You're perfectly correct that these two pieces of equipment come from different sides of the musical equation, but to say the CJ LS 16 is "very lush and tubey" strikes me as an overstatement of the CJ sound aesthetic.

Rushton: That is how I feel. It is certainly not a knock on the product. With many systems they match up incredibly well. If Bigkidz is looking for a warmer tubier sound, the CJ would be a better choice. I thought it was an important factor in answering his question.

Jtinn, I have enjoyed your contributions to these forums. In this case, your shorthand comment struck me as directionally correct but overstated, and, as a result, meriting some clarification. CJ's equipment stopped being "very lush" (in any sense that I can understand that statement) well before the LS16. That the CJ LS16 continues to be "warmer," as you say above, is without question when contrasted to the Lamm; to call it "very lush" has the potential to mislead. It is like calling the Lamm "etched and analytical" (which it is not) in place of your much more balanced description of it as being "more to the neutral side" (which I find quite true). Thanks.