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

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.

John. You may well be right. If that is the case, I guess I don't like the "supertube"

Swampwalker... yeah, mostly. Legally, yes. Entirely, no. Can't drive anymore... except a riding mower, and a jet ski slowly...and only in open waters. haha. The PC does talk though.

downunder.. dead on. The dealer told me when I remarked about the overall lack of warmth, that Lou Jhonson said the CT line especially, is the "most neutral preamps we've ever made." .. and so much for the legendary CJ pres. A new path is taken and a revered one now gone. They have decided to cast their lot into the arena of neutrality. Along with countless others that intend to offer up similar sounding units. I've nothing against neutrality. Not at all. My tastes lean me towards an older sort of sonic embrace. Lush, rich, wet, and warm, with resolution detail and inpact enough to become involving... and as of late with my last little comparison shopping for happiness in the guise of getting another preamp, I found that simply with a different set of tubes, and a new IC from pre to amp.. I have all the above, save a touch more quickmness. that last item is not actually a good enough reason to drop 6 to 11K on another pre. That new set of NOS tubes has solidified things quite well. The upcoming MIT IC (renting the one I have now), is simply ridiculous. I'd never have tought a lesser level of IC, especially in between the pre & amp to be quite so good a match. though I do have another MIT in the system as well.. and the latest addition of some Sig 10 speaker wires has been a nice one too. I've actually been able to take off the grills from the JR's for the first time ever.

So in fact it would appear my complaints/desires for another level of performance have been realized at this point... and for way less than the cost of a new pre. Though one never knows what winds may blow their way. So long as it ain't just the need/desire to change for the sake of change, I'll be fine. thanks a lot for the input/insights... all of you have saved me tons of 'ducats'. and it would seem the answer to this thread, now, is the Thor. Mr. Marks product maintains the lush yet quickly nimble magic that sounds so appealing to me.

Blindjim- Bummer about the blindness but kudos for the truth in advertising (grin). Never heard a Thor. Nuetrality is over-rated if it eliminates the emotional context of the music. Good luck, let us know how you progress with the Thor.

Well, thanks much for all the info. I surely do appreciate it as always.

Now, near a year later though not quite, the die seems cast. there really is no 'best' whatever the device. Certainly some have performance levels that are well above average, yet 'best' terminology is a misleading tag in an audio system as the integral word here is "system" which infers some degree of synergy of the whole of things.

OK. Good. When you hear that synergistic cohesion perform at a level that immediately upon hearing it you know the sound is one of those, "that's it.". sounds, why not then obtain the thing?

Consequently, my most recent audio epiphiany was hearing the thor TA 1000 and the Thor monos (30wpc) on the VR4 JRs... with Audience wires and a tube CDP. Apart from the amps, obtaining the Thor pre would put me quite close to that fascinating sound.

By all rights at this point an original Thor TA 1000 MK II should be delivered to me shortly.

My single concern was/is compatibility with my balanced only amp. Electrically? probably no. otherwise? We'll see.

Then there will be all the which wires? which tubes? Isoing? ...etc.

Just thought it only fair to show some closure, my sincerity, and my gratitude.