Conrad Johnson ACT2 against Audio Research Ref 3

"ARC has more detail up front, IMO ARC can be more hi fi sounding.
Overall cj easier to listen to over a wider range of recordings.
let the flames begin:)"

It is not an issue of flames but an understanding of what flavor for each of us rocks our sonic boat.
CJ ACT 2 is indeed a fine preamp. Just not my flavor. The ARC Ref 3 for me and my tastes simply lights up my ears.

Oneobgin, what don't you like about the CJ Act 2?

There is nothing I don't like about it. I just like the Ref 3 better. As I said it is a flavor thing and the ARC sonic signature for me is what excites my auditory nerves.

I understand perfectly Oneobgin, after all. . . I am 'pregnant with Ref 3' right now! Yet, as I have never heard the CJ ACT 2, I thought of asking you what the ACT 2's particular 'flavor' is, in your view.

I might be able to answer Guidocorona's question. I had a CJ Premier 17LS and explored the Act 2 as a upgrade. I liked the Act 2 and it was certainly a upgrade from the Premier. I felt it increased the detail heard in my system and there was a increase in bass weight but, it did share the same sort of laid back warm sound that the Premier had. I can see how a system with speakers that are a little on the bright side and very revealing would sound good with this preamp. Especially if it is a all digital source system. The "warmth" would make the music more listenable in such a system. However, my speakers are already in the "laid back, warm" camp (Vandersteen 5A) and the ARC Ref. 3 matched much better with them. It really isn't which is better, they are both great preamps. It is what matches best with the rest of your system to acheive the sound you want.