What speakers are you using with your Conrad Johnson gear?

[Big Dog RJ]

Greetings from down unda, trust you're all enjoying the music on those wonderful systems along with that very fine CJ gear.

Speaking of "fine CJ gear" or in terms of fine amplification for that matter, I came to realize one important factor that I may have missed over the decades.

Since the last few weeks, having experienced the new Maggie top of the line- 30.7's, it was at this point I realized something that has always intrigued me.

Getting back to the OP Joe, who titled this thread as what speakers are we using with our CJ amps, it finally hit me and was very apparent!

Over the years having various combinations of pre-power amps, owning dealerships and advising people who are genuinely interested in the truth in sound, I always got a bit stuck between amp or speakers...

The question was always never an easy straight forward one, whether to spend more on amplification or whether it's necessary to focus more on the speakers. I used to advise, obtain the best possible amplifiers you can afford, then settle for the speakers. Or get the best speakers that are closer to the natural sound, and settle for whatever amp you can possibly afford. Then again, if finances permitting, and a certain level of expenditure is not an issue, by all means go for both! High quality speakers and equally high quality amplification, that way you are rest assured you're getting your monies worth!

However, not all of us quite have this luxury of choice, and we're left with what we can "actually" afford, keeping in line with other priorities, such as house, family, kids to educate and basically just about anything else other than hi-fi...

The Maggie 30.7's were driven with two sets of amplifiers, which I auditioned at length. One were the Dan D'Agostino momentums - monoblocks using the Momentum preamp. The other set of monoblocks used were the Relentless monoblocks, rated at 1500w at 8ohms, doubles to 3000w at 4ohms and then again doubles to 6000w on 2ohms! These huge beasts drive anything in front of them, truly effortless drive with truck loads of headroom, grabs the 30.7's by their tails and just slaps them silly! It's not even funny.

It was a truly amazing experience, one that I had not experienced from any Maggie system to date. However, at this level of expenditure, I would always ask myself is it necessary and how do the 30.7's compare directly with the CLX's driven full range. Well that was quite an easy task, since this chap happens to own both systems! The 30.7's and CLX's, including the mighty Infinity IRSV's and the Martin Logan Statement Evolution II system.

Having heard his Statements and IRSV's before, I already knew the sound, so I was more keen on what these new Maggie's could do. They have come very far in terms of capturing the low notes and providing a more open detailed level of bass since it uses separate bass panels that are dis-jointed from the mids-highs panel. This allows for each panel type to operate optimally, free from its neighboring panels, which were joined together in one frame, such as previous Maggie's (MG3 & MG20 series).

I would say the 30.7's are basically a full upgrade assault on the original Tympani design, which were joined panels in one form or another. Magnepan have also used far better quality parts, internal wiring and top quality connectors. They've upgraded a few more things on the cross-overs which are now housed in the panel, rather than in an external box having more connections to deal with, and they have also incorporated a bass control switch to adjust for room interaction.

This post is not all about Maggie's and the new 30.7's, rather I'm trying to address my own dilemma between amps and speakers. So here's a system where the cost of amplification alone is well over the 100 grand mark! The speakers are around 30 grand, the 30.7's retail in Aus for just over 50 grand, and the CLX's are closer to 40 grand now, depending on finish. The Statements and IRSV systems are well over the 100 grand mark as well but here's the thing:

The biggest contributing factor to all these top of the line SOTA classic systems was not the amplification, rather it was the speakers! Hence, regardless of how much money and effort you put in to constantly upgrading the amplification, the overall "quality of sound" will not improve unless the speakers are up-to par or beyond the level of the amplifiers driving them. Which also leads to my final point, such that listening to the CLX's against the 30.7's and comparing notes directly, I strongly felt that both types of transducers had their special attributes, not one was better than the other.

The full frequency spec from top to bottom is very fine, detailed, powerful and smooth on the Maggie's, capturing a good amount of low level detail. The CLX's have a pristine mid-range, that is the hallmark of the finest stat mid-range money can buy, and yet again excells in transparency and sheer speed and agility in the bass, both systems have equally extended smooth highs.

So I did enjoy my time very much listening to this particular SOTA line up. When I got home, and as I'm typing this post, referring back to Joe and his original question based on speakers. For some darn reason I just prefer what this particular CJ amplification combination delivers with the CLX's driven full range, I guess it just sounds right!

I've come across numerous systems where people have spent an absolute fortune on ancillary equipment and accessories plus amplification but then settled down to only one type of speaker system, mainly due to running out of budget... If this was based the other way around, they would realize how much more their systems can achieve and then slowly upgrade other gear from that point onwards... It does make a difference and a very palpable one for that matter.

There will be others who would most definitely disagree with me on this, and think or suggest that it's the amplification that makes the biggest difference, I would agree in fact true! However, the speakers must be well designed to bring out the absolute best from the recording and if they fall short then what's the point in excessive expenditure...

Just thought I'd share this, as at this point in time, with the CLX's in place to further upgrade from here is a waste of money unless it's a complete overhaul, which I'm not willing to do, and I'm extremely grateful to have come this far, with all the tremendous help and support from family and friends, this is where the express train stops! Cheers RJ

[admin]

Thanks for the insightful and comprehensive experience summary. As you know, I use a pair of 20.1's in my setup but consider the CLX's my "dream speakers". When I saw the 30.7's released from Magnepan it really caught my interest. The associated price tag is rather high (for me) so I really never considered the purchase. I would love to have the opportunity for a direct comparison listening session. I'm sure you had a great time listening to all these wonderful pieces of music equipment. Congrats, and thanks for the great writeup.

[Mr.V]

I'm a bit of a hifi fanatic: I have three separate hi end stereo systems in my home (bedroom, garage, listening room) and a dedicated home theater.

Two of my stereo systems feature C-J gear.

The main system is based on an Evo 2000 and sings oh so sweetly through Aerial 10T's.

The bedroom system has two C-J components: MF 200 and PF 1, playing through Chapman T-7's.

[macster]

Vandersteen 3A Signatures+CJPV5 (currently at CJ getting repaired)+CJMF2500A.

M~

[01rkclassic]

Magnepan 1.6qr for me

[Tregv10]

Funny i see a lot of martin Logan speakers, which i have (Request) and when i had amps that i bought krell,mcintosh,i Kept the Conrad Johnson mf2100, it just sounds right! krell had more authority in bass but that all it had ...

[Rooze]

Just picked up a nice Evolution 2000 to power my Dunlavy III’s
Haven’t got done moving speakers around yet, to get them dialed in, but the sound is already very good .
Next up is to find a good tubed preamp to go with the Evo 2000. Any suggestions ?
Must have a remote !

[admin]

Just picked up a nice Evolution 2000 to power my Dunlavy III’s
Haven’t got done moving speakers around yet, to get them dialed in, but the sound is already very good .
Next up is to find a good tubed preamp to go with the Evo 2000. Any suggestions ?
Must have a remote !

First, welcome to CJO. Nice to have you with us.

I also own the Evolution 2000 amp and what a great beast it is! I think there are many options. Ultimately, you can't go wrong with a CJ preamp as they are always so well balanced. I personally use a PV12A preamp and it's truly wonderful. Of course, if you are looking for something newer in the line the ET series are very good, or the GAT if you have the funds. Again, congrats on the 2000!

[Rooze]

Just picked up a nice Evolution 2000 to power my Dunlavy III’s
Haven’t got done moving speakers around yet, to get them dialed in, but the sound is already very good .
Next up is to find a good tubed preamp to go with the Evo 2000. Any suggestions ?
Must have a remote !

First, welcome to CJO. Nice to have you with us.

I also own the Evolution 2000 amp and what a great beast it is! I think there are many options. Ultimately, you can't go wrong with a CJ preamp as they are always so well balanced. I personally use a PV12A preamp and it's truly wonderful. Of course, if you are looking for something newer in the line the ET series are very good, or the GAT if you have the funds. Again, congrats on the 2000!

Thanks for the welcome!

I'd really like the 16LS or LS2 but they show up so infrequently on the used market and are generally snapped up pretty quickly when fairly priced. I also need to save up more $$ before I can afford one!

[Big Dog RJ]

Nice one with the Evo2000 amplifier, those Dunlevy's should be getting some real current drive on this thing.

Re. to preamp suggestions; well as Admin very correctly pointed out, the sky's the limit on that one! Also depends on your budget. Just to compare in groups and help to categorise your choices; I would form these three categories:

1: Older models: PV14, PV15, ET3, ET5 (all have remote)

2. Premier series & older: PFR-(SS but very tube in character), Premier 14, 16LS, 17LS, 18LS-(SS very similar to PFR)

3. Enhanced Triode & Advanced Composite Triode: CT5, CT6, ACT2, ET6, ET7/S2, GAT/S2

I may have missed a few but these are pretty much the main categories of preamps that I've had direct experience with in some form or the other, including owning most of them at one point in time. Each one has its own merits and helps to evolve a particular system in the way you prefer. For example, if you prefer a more relaxed laid back presentation, with wonderful musicality, the ET3 or PV15 would be a great match with the Evo amp. Then if you are looking for power in the bass region, plus some very fast transient detail and superb level of control, the ACT2 and CT5 will deliver exactly that. Take this to another level and you're looking at the ET7S2 and GATS2, and then so goes the price as well, completely different level!

Either of these preamps are fine musical instruments that will deliver exactly what they were designed for. As you go up the chain, there are subtle differences in areas of inner detail, soundstage depth and the ability to provide more resolution. I term it as "subtle" mainly because all CJ preamps are capable of very refined musical quality. The differences vary from around 20-30% in improvement. Obviously when you're comparing an ET3 to a GAT, that margin of improvement would be far greater, and so is the price!

At the end of the day it all depends on your musical tastes, finances and how loud a range you would like to increase listening levels without distortion, plus i.e. if your speakers can hold itself together at high levels...

There are quite a few other CJ preamps that can match the overall musicality and superb 3D soundstage of their pricier counterparts but they don't have remote, hence you insisted on remote. Just to mention these, none other than the PV12 (probably the best CJ pre ever made to date) fantastic value for money and very easily upgradable, PV10AL, Classic 1SE/ Classic 2SE. Anyway, the choice is yours!

All the best mate, cheers
RJ

[Rooze]

Hey RJ,

Thanks for the fantastic information!

I've thought about compiling some kind of list of CJ options, with sonic attributes, etc, and you've gone and done it for me - thanks!

Budget is somewhat flexible but those listed in your option #3 are presently out of range . I've had a lot of outlay in the past six weeks (for me), with the purchase of a turntable, phono stage, speakers and the EVO 2000, but in a few weeks I should be able to look in the range of $1500 to $3000 on the used market. (I'd prefer $1500/$2000)

As far as sound priorities - I've owned a lot of amps over the years and they've been all over the sonic spectrum, each with distinct attributes and each with their own set of compromises. It all started with a Linn LK1/LK2 way back. Since then I've owned a Krell FBP200 and that Krappy little integrated they came out with 20+ years ago, the 300 something. Moon W10 monos, Cary V12 monos, Cary 2A3 monos, Lyngdorf, Tact and Carver digitals, the list goes on.

A Leak Stereo 20 driving Sonus Faber Electa's was my first introduction to the tube sound back in the late 80's, and I loved that combo, though it didn't play loud...I still have the Leak amp in storage in the UK!

The two amps that perhaps delivered the most musical enjoyment for me were the CJ CAV50 that I bought after dumping the Krell integrated...and the CJ CA200.

The CA200 was a fantastic all-rounder that I should never have sold. It had a wonderful tone, almost tube-like, and checked most of the usual audiophile boxes.... But I picked up a pair of Carver Amazing Platimum's not long after buying the CA200 and it didn't have the juice. I replaced it with a pair of Odyssey Stratos Extreme monos (on loan to me from a friend) with a Supratek Chardonnay preamp, and then later the Ampzilla 2000 monoblocks and the SST Ambrosia preamp, which were some of the best solid state I've owned, but ultimately not as musical as the CJ.

So - (he tries to get to the point...) I'm not a bass freak. I like a wide/deep stage with good layering and imaging. I have flexibility of placement with the Dunlavy 3's in a 15x17x10 room, so pulling them up to around 7' into the room gives a great illusion of depth and they stage/image nicely with the EVO.
I don't care too much about highs soaring into the 25khz range as I've been listening to loud music for 45 years and my hearing ain't that good...what?

But more than anything else I'm leaning toward 'flesh on bones'. A big, juicy, wet, sloppy kiss of a sound with body and soul. Just a couple weeks back I heard a Synthesis A100T at a dealer in Virginia (Deja Vu Audio) and absolutely loved it. It had that classic tube sound but with all of the air and detail intact. Unfortunately it was $8K and they rarely show up on the used market in the USA. Plus I wouldn't feel good buying that particular amp used, as I'd never heard of it before the dealer introduced me to it, so he should get my coin.

Anyway, I think it's clear that I lean more to the classic tube sound (I've owned ARC preamps, nice but too lean) and I'm prepared to sacrifice only a small amount of resolution to get what I want.

The EVO has nice tone and great control. It has the body of a solid state amp and the soul of a tube amp, I just want more body....

I've heard the 18LS and liked it a lot - for a while I could've been fooled into thinking there was a tube in there somewhere, but that illusion diminished over time. I've heard the PV10 but have only a vague recollection of its sound. Based solely on the opinion of others, I seem to be drawn to the 16LS, rightly or wrongly. Or perhaps I should sell the EVO and just buy another CA200..!!

That's where I'm at! Yeah, I know...I've got it bad. I actually quit the hobby pretty much for a couple years but the Music Hall turntable acquisition had me pulling out all my old albums and it just kinda went downhill from there!

Oh...I'm using the pre-out from a Cambridge Audio Azur 840A V2 Integrated to drive the EVO, temporarily.

Cheers!

Rooze

[Rooze]

Greetings from down unda, trust you're all enjoying the music on those wonderful systems along with that very fine CJ gear.

Speaking of "fine CJ gear" or in terms of fine amplification for that matter, I came to realize one important factor that I may have missed over the decades.

Since the last few weeks, having experienced the new Maggie top of the line- 30.7's, it was at this point I realized something that has always intrigued me.

Getting back to the OP Joe, who titled this thread as what speakers are we using with our CJ amps, it finally hit me and was very apparent!

Over the years having various combinations of pre-power amps, owning dealerships and advising people who are genuinely interested in the truth in sound, I always got a bit stuck between amp or speakers...

The question was always never an easy straight forward one, whether to spend more on amplification or whether it's necessary to focus more on the speakers. I used to advise, obtain the best possible amplifiers you can afford, then settle for the speakers. Or get the best speakers that are closer to the natural sound, and settle for whatever amp you can possibly afford. Then again, if finances permitting, and a certain level of expenditure is not an issue, by all means go for both! High quality speakers and equally high quality amplification, that way you are rest assured you're getting your monies worth!

However, not all of us quite have this luxury of choice, and we're left with what we can "actually" afford, keeping in line with other priorities, such as house, family, kids to educate and basically just about anything else other than hi-fi...

The Maggie 30.7's were driven with two sets of amplifiers, which I auditioned at length. One were the Dan D'Agostino momentums - monoblocks using the Momentum preamp. The other set of monoblocks used were the Relentless monoblocks, rated at 1500w at 8ohms, doubles to 3000w at 4ohms and then again doubles to 6000w on 2ohms! These huge beasts drive anything in front of them, truly effortless drive with truck loads of headroom, grabs the 30.7's by their tails and just slaps them silly! It's not even funny.

It was a truly amazing experience, one that I had not experienced from any Maggie system to date. However, at this level of expenditure, I would always ask myself is it necessary and how do the 30.7's compare directly with the CLX's driven full range. Well that was quite an easy task, since this chap happens to own both systems! The 30.7's and CLX's, including the mighty Infinity IRSV's and the Martin Logan Statement Evolution II system.

Having heard his Statements and IRSV's before, I already knew the sound, so I was more keen on what these new Maggie's could do. They have come very far in terms of capturing the low notes and providing a more open detailed level of bass since it uses separate bass panels that are dis-jointed from the mids-highs panel. This allows for each panel type to operate optimally, free from its neighboring panels, which were joined together in one frame, such as previous Maggie's (MG3 & MG20 series).

I would say the 30.7's are basically a full upgrade assault on the original Tympani design, which were joined panels in one form or another. Magnepan have also used far better quality parts, internal wiring and top quality connectors. They've upgraded a few more things on the cross-overs which are now housed in the panel, rather than in an external box having more connections to deal with, and they have also incorporated a bass control switch to adjust for room interaction.

This post is not all about Maggie's and the new 30.7's, rather I'm trying to address my own dilemma between amps and speakers. So here's a system where the cost of amplification alone is well over the 100 grand mark! The speakers are around 30 grand, the 30.7's retail in Aus for just over 50 grand, and the CLX's are closer to 40 grand now, depending on finish. The Statements and IRSV systems are well over the 100 grand mark as well but here's the thing:

The biggest contributing factor to all these top of the line SOTA classic systems was not the amplification, rather it was the speakers! Hence, regardless of how much money and effort you put in to constantly upgrading the amplification, the overall "quality of sound" will not improve unless the speakers are up-to par or beyond the level of the amplifiers driving them. Which also leads to my final point, such that listening to the CLX's against the 30.7's and comparing notes directly, I strongly felt that both types of transducers had their special attributes, not one was better than the other.

The full frequency spec from top to bottom is very fine, detailed, powerful and smooth on the Maggie's, capturing a good amount of low level detail. The CLX's have a pristine mid-range, that is the hallmark of the finest stat mid-range money can buy, and yet again excells in transparency and sheer speed and agility in the bass, both systems have equally extended smooth highs.

So I did enjoy my time very much listening to this particular SOTA line up. When I got home, and as I'm typing this post, referring back to Joe and his original question based on speakers. For some darn reason I just prefer what this particular CJ amplification combination delivers with the CLX's driven full range, I guess it just sounds right!

I've come across numerous systems where people have spent an absolute fortune on ancillary equipment and accessories plus amplification but then settled down to only one type of speaker system, mainly due to running out of budget... If this was based the other way around, they would realize how much more their systems can achieve and then slowly upgrade other gear from that point onwards... It does make a difference and a very palpable one for that matter.

There will be others who would most definitely disagree with me on this, and think or suggest that it's the amplification that makes the biggest difference, I would agree in fact true! However, the speakers must be well designed to bring out the absolute best from the recording and if they fall short then what's the point in excessive expenditure...

Just thought I'd share this, as at this point in time, with the CLX's in place to further upgrade from here is a waste of money unless it's a complete overhaul, which I'm not willing to do, and I'm extremely grateful to have come this far, with all the tremendous help and support from family and friends, this is where the express train stops! Cheers RJ

Great post. I just wanted to add something to what you've already said in your post.

I've thought a lot about system hierarchy and where one should start to build and how one should allocate funds. I remember the old Ivor Tiefenbrun (Linn Audio) adage in the late 70's that the majority of funds, time effort, consideration etc, should go into the source. That always made sense to me and the computer idiom of 'garbage in - garbage out' evolved later and added weight to his theory.

But as I've blown through lord knows how much cash building and rebuilding audio systems over the years I now have a completely different theory.

The first consideration when planning the purchase and/or development of a good home audio system, imho, is the speaker-room interface. I'd almost consider the loudspeaker and the room as one single component with two sections to it....almost like the mating of a good preamp with a good power amp and creating a great integrated amp from the two components (if that makes sense).

If you want any loudspeaker system to give its best, it needs to be placed in a room with a geometry and layout that works sympathetically with the design of the speaker. At a basic level, putting a small speaker into a large room, or vice versa, may be sub-optimal. But also, practical constraints within a room might dictate that the speaker be placed up against a wall and not out into the room, for example - which is also important when deciding on a type of speaker.
You can dig down deeper and think about the need for diffraction or absorption materials with specific designs such as planars/panels etc. Are you going to be able to introduce these things into your room if it isn't a dedicated listening space? Do you have a room with lots of glass? Is the ribbon in your new Magnepan 3.7i going to grab you buy the throat when you try to play it loud?..etc.

It's not always possible to bring a speaker home and demo it in your space before purchasing, but it's wise to give consideration to the speaker/room synergy before buying a speaker unheard, or before making a decision based on a demo that took place in a room that is nothing like your own.

Also, I'd argue that speakers have the biggest single influence on the sound signature that you'll hear. They create and shape the sound at the macro level where the rest of the gear behind the speakers should shape the sound more at the micro level. In other words, if you don't like the particular sonic signature of a certain type of speaker, you probably ain't going to change that signature by switching in a different CD player, nor should you be trying to.

So given that and the above, it makes sense (to me) to start from the speaker then work backwards.

Just my 2 pennies worth.

[Big Dog RJ]

That's a definite Rooze!

No doubt, the room and its parameters plays a significant role in any system, and especially in a high-end system for that matter. The best part is where you walk out from a great demo at the dealer's, and when set up at home, it sounds even better! Then the total purchase and decision to acquire the item is fully justified.

It's very tedious and trickey to get that system synergy in place... So sometimes we tend to have a habit of changing / upgrading components thinking about the foreseeable improvements but haven't thought about the very basics. These basic elements, such as the room, placement, listening position, ancillary gear, cables, interconnects including the AC mains power supply, all play a very significant role in the overall "quality" sound of the system.

As you rightly pointed out, there's no way anyone can get this combination right just off the bat. In fact it takes several years, if not longer, to achieve something great and also to appreciate the value and investment put in.

I have had so many disasters and disappointments along the way, sometimes I wonder how the good wife puts up with all my nonsense! One thing for sure is that there is no short cut to any place worth going. It takes time and effort, and small steps plus a few upgrades every 3-4 years is fine as long as you have benchmarked a certain msrgin of improvement.

In my case, after all the drama, my margin of improvement has to be around 45-50%, otherwise to me it's a waste of money and some dealer is benefiting from my expenditure.

I've also learnt that if it's not 40-45%, then wait! Have patience and something else will come along and provide not only 45% of improvement but over 50-60% of a margin, and that's the component to get!

There are other critical factors to consider, such as parts, after sales service, technical support and so on... One thing for sure is with CJ you simply can't go wrong. They aren't bullet proof and from time to time once in awhile they do require fixing but that attention for service is minute compared to many other brands. Some of the other robust and extremely well built equipment I've used over the decades are from VTL, Manley Lab's and McIntosh, they are truly rock solid stuff and a service level that's superb! CJ has had a similar track record since the 70's & 80's therefore, this has been the most important brand of gear that I've used in nearly every system I've sold and personally owned. They are worth keeping and maintaining for years to come.

Since you seem to be very interested in the premier 16LS, that's in fact a superb preamp to match with virtually any power amplifier, regardless of price. The premier series amplifiers can hold themselves towards the top end SOTA in amplification and will add a sense of musicality like no other. It's just a matter of personal taste and preference towards the overall type of sound you want, which you can custom make by the careful selection of a high quality preamp.

I truly hope that you find your preamp of choice and it fits in perfectly with the EVO 2000.
Cheers mate, and have a good one!
RJ

[david1111]

I use Kef R107's with my cj gear.

Dave

[joeinid]

Very nice Dave. I loved the R107 when I heard them. I’m sure it’s a great match.

[paulCJ]

Sonist Audio Concerto 4 (Gen 2) with a PV10al pre-amp and a MV-55 power-amp.
Love this combo.

[Puma Cat]

Harbeth 30.2 and Dynaudio Contour S3.4 with Esotar 2 tweeters with my CT-5 and LP70S.

[admin]

Harbeth 30.2 and Dynaudio Contour S3.4 with Esotar 2 tweeters with my CT-5 and LP70S.

Very nice. I think last year they released the 40th anniversary edition of the 30.2's. When the same speaker design is utilized for four decades it really speaks to the quality of the original design. Congrats.

Sonist Audio Concerto 4 (Gen 2) with a PV10al pre-amp and a MV-55 power-amp.
Love this combo.

I really like the cabinet design of the Concerto 4's. It has that unique retro look with the recessed tweeter.

[Puma Cat]

Harbeth 30.2 and Dynaudio Contour S3.4 with Esotar 2 tweeters with my CT-5 and LP70S.

Very nice. I think last year they released the 40th anniversary edition of the 30.2's. When the same speaker design is utilized for four decades it really speaks to the quality of the original design. Congrats.

Thanks.

Just some clarification for accuracy: there is only one version of the 30.2s, and that is the 40th Anniverary editions; they are one and the same. The non-Anniversary model is the 30.1, which is still available as a separate SKU. The 30.2s were launched in 2017, IIRC.

This is different than the 40.2s which also available as a specific 40th Anniversary model.

Cheers,
Stephen aka PC

[admin]

Maybe I am remembering it wrong? Was the 30.2 anniversary edition not based on the same design as the earlier versions? I thought I read an article about them awhile back. If I remember they have that distinctive offset baffle on one side. I could be wrong though,... maybe I'm confusing it with something else?