Luxman CL34: How does it compare today?

Really excellent made preamp, i believe the cl35 was for North American and the cl34 was for Asia ( could be vice vera).  Nicely built, excellent quality, very warm sounding.    I own a cl35 with a step volume control, imh it was better than the cl34.  Same category as the mcintosh c-22, but slight analytical sounding.  Tube like but sound close to Accuphase.  Tube makes a huge different, i prefer the 803s by telefunken on them.  

The CL34 is a wonderful vintage preamp but, like virtually any piece of vintage gear from the 1980s, will require some attention in order to sound it's best.  All of the caps will almost certainly need to be replaced, as well as the resistors that supply the tube voltage and associated diodes in all likelihood.  The pots and rotary switches also get dusty and noisy and will typically need a good cleaning, if not outright replacement.  IMO replacing the cheap volume pot with a stepped attenuator can make a significant improvement in the sound, at the expense of vintage originality.

@zipost and @br3098, thanks so much for your responses as I've learned something new today about sound quality improvement through stepped attenuators. I'm curious though, why are stepped better than the regular rotary pots, is it because it is more of an explicit switch that regulates voltage better?

And yeah, I'm aware of the amount of work that might have to go into replacing some of the components. I've done quite a bit of that to get it where I want.

Good to know about the tube rolling. I've had great experiences rolling my SQ-N10.

Seeing that you guys have both had experience, would you recommend any newer tube preamps in the $1000-$2000 price range that would outdo the CL34?

I had the CL-34 and CL-35/III at the same time. Both were in immaculate condition, premium tubes in good shape. I invited a "jury" of Golden Ears to help me choose — a violist (Berlin Phil); the composer/performer of "The Emerald Forest" soundtrack; and a recording engineer. We only used their own music (performed or recorded by them) which of course they knew intimately.

All three preferred the 34. As one put it, "The 35 is great audio! The 34 is great music."

I was a bit disappointed — I wanted the CL-35 — but I concurred with their judgement. Speakers were Quad-63, very revealing of nuance.

The only flaw in the comparison was I had to use an SUT with the 34 to test LOMCs, whereas the 35 had its dedicated silver-wire transformers.