CJ vs. BAT vs. THOR preamps, who's best?


Hi.
Looking for some input as to which of the above's top of the line, past & present preamps provide the best overall flexibility, and sonically involving presentation? ...and have the best support. Likely one of these will be paired with at least a solid state amp... possibly a tube as well if I bi-amp. Currently using VR4 JR's and if these change it will be to a little more efficient set of loudspeakers, but likely as close to full range as is possible.

I lean towards the euphonic - romantic side of things sonically speaking. And, 'gasp!' a bit towards the darker side of neutral... with needs being, very good to great bottom end and natural earthy sounding mids - no extension in the high end arena really necessary, just sweet and balanced on the whole.

I've got the VK5i, heard the TA1000 mkII, and know little about the CJ end of things other than that they invert the signal during it's development and only the BAT can afford one the use of a balanced setup... gotta go single ended with the others.

...again, support & flexibility with different amps are almost as if not as important as the sonic signature, to me.

Thanks in advance...
blindjim
I am not sure I can add much more to the above posts (particularly jmcgrogan's), except that I've owned both the BAT Vk-5i and the Thor TA-2000. To give you an idea of my sonic biases, I preferred the Thor over the VK-5i in all categories (e.g., tonality - which was more natural and extended, particularly in the upper midrange to treble- imaging, micro and macroynamics) save one: the Thor was just a touch noisier than the BAT VK-5i. In my system, I also found the Thor was a little more versatile when used with other amplifiers (including everything from an Aragon 4004 Mk II to Conrad Johnson Premier 8XS's to CAT JL-1's), whereas the BAT performed at its best for me only when paired with BAT amps in a balnced configuration. However, either one could be used with a solid state amp, particularly given the matchings that you propose. I never had any problems with either preamp, and found their respective companies to be both very accessible and willing to answer questions.

As to BAT's and CJ's top of the line units, while I demoed the VK-50se (one of BAT's previous top of the line), I was not sufficiently enamored of its sound to pursue further investigaion, and felt that the cost difference in upgrading from the VK-5 to the VK-50 was not justified. Moreover, given your stated preferences, I think the VK-5i more closely matches your desire for a euphonic-romantic presentation than the VK-50, which was more neutral and detailed than the VK-5i. (However, these opinions are based on one extended listening session with the VK-50se, so take that opinion with a large grain of salt).

The CJ ART/ACT preamps, on the other hand, are among the finest, if not the finest, active line stages I have heard. They provide everything you are looking for - sweet, balanced, a touch romantic, with natural sounding mids and authoritative bass, - but still are outstanding at resolving low level information, and present an extended, airy, and grain free treble. Thus, I would urge that you give tham a listen, if possible. (I would also suggest you skip the CJ 16LS, and go straight for the top of the line CJ units.)
thanks Fplanner, Dogfish, swampwalker... and John.. man I like that swampwalker handle... I keep thinking about the comic book character Swampthing".... well, anyhow... thanks... and John I've decided on one of the MIT ic'S BETWEEN PRE & AMP... it'll be one of the Magnums, not sure which.. probably the '2'... the shotgun 2 in there now is very good.

Psuedo balanced, or flat out & straight up balanced, I think regardless it's in the mix wether or not it'll work for my tastes. I'll just lug the amp with me. I'm fast getting to the notion (only took 30 yr.), it don't matter the science behind it. I'm not so arrogant as to 'need' a particular configuration inside, to be OK with what happens outside, but I do deeply appreciate the heads up on that aspect.

So that's where I'm at.. and for the time being, satisfied with what I've got now.. save for the sub and PRE TO AMP ic.

But things don't last forever. good or bad. Recalling another bit of wisdom I got here, having the 'additional' piece on site is a better way of making a good decision... so I may well end up with two pres... beats me. though my paths are far more defined now.. choices are clearer too. It's as always for me and some like me, simply a matter of time... and even that may shorten up a mite, should fortune smile in my direction.
cj pre amps are no longer sweet and romantic. I have had the ACT 2 and CT5 in my system for the last 2.5 months and I am afraid to say they are now too neutral, for my tastes at least. I found neither really posess that great midrange warmth or any bloom cj has always been famous for.
I own the cj prem350 and have previously owned the prem 16 and prem 8a's so it is with more than a little dissappointment that I sent both units back after a very long audition period.
Personally I found a friends little Cary SLP 98 more musical and better at being a tube pre amp than the cj's. It has nice tube warmth and makes all recordings fun to listen to.

If you value strict neutrality you will like the new cj pre amps, however if you like a little tube warmth and bloom, look at the prem 16/ART or look elsewhere.

cheers
It's the alledged "SuperTube". I've heard similar responses from folks when BAT first went to it, and Audio Research and CJ fans say the same thing. The 6H30 tube that they all use now is more dynamic and powerful, the 6922 tubes had more of the midrange bloom that traditional tubes were known for.

Personal tastes and system matching will dictate which tube sounds best to you.