... and it is good. Very good.
Different from my VAC Standard MKII. The CAT is much faster, cleaner, more extended. The VAC has a lusher midrange to the extent that the CAT almost sounds like it has a midrange suck-out by comparison.
But damn the CAT is so fast and extended top to bottom. Superb bass control and very quiet. The press is right on this one - it leans well the solid-state side of the sonic spectrum for a tube unit.
The CAT has the built-in phono which is much better than my ProJect Tube Box SE (or is it MKII, I forget) which makes sense as the buzz re the CAT's phono stage is that its supposed to be world-class.
The CAT is much more bare-bones than the VAC - 3 inputs vs. 6, no remote. But that works for me - External DAC, disc spinner and phono is all I need.
Both have way more gain than I need but as the CAT has discrete resistor volume, the steps are a little big, but live-able. I know the CAT folks can reduce the gain and I might do this if I upgrade the MKII status ($1000).
I have no clue as to the age of the 10 tubes in the CAT (3 x 6922 and 2 x 12AX7 for both the phone and line sections) so a retube is in order. Open to tube suggestions - I know Jim McShane is familiar with tubes for this pre and likes EH 6922s which add a little more body than the stock Sovteks, apparently.
Fun stuff...
-Mike
The first audio dealer who got me involved in this wonderful .. err ... crazy hobby was Mike from Precision AV down in So California. I never heard the amps, but that CAT was a great preamp. Mike had lots of expensive gear at that time. Glad I am spending my money more wisely
Mike,
Any diy'er worth his salt can put in new volume controls for you.
Ask Martin he just put in new Khozmo 48 stepped attenuators himself.
Or have karl put in the Shalco bodies with the resistors of your choice.
If MK 2 status includes new stepped attenuators, plus some other tweaks then it is worth it.
I would imagine the Cat would be too fast for the likes of a class d amp, your Vac is probably a much better sonic mate to the Cherry amps. The Cat would probably be nice with your VAC amp though!
mike
Owned a CAT. Actually martin has it now. The CT is very neutral in its presentation. Tube roling makes a HUGE difference. Also very sensitive to power cords. Try several. The old Top Gun was a killer cord for the CAT. Wish I had a TWL cord back then. The CAT also benifits big time with footers. Seemed to have liked the "dead balls" from Edmund Scientific. Cabling as well makes big sonic differences. it is just so neutral and revealing one will hear every cable change.
I would agree with Topround that the VAC amp would be a wonderfull combo. A hybrid class "D" maybe however still leaning towards the VAC.
One thing to know about any CAT is it will reveal any short comings before the Pre. If your CD ain't up to snuff go elsewhere unless you are prepared to spend more money. You have been warned.
charles
Yes ... footers! With very transparent tube based preamps I found that something squishy under the main body where the tubes are helps with the musicality, as opposed to something hard or pointy. Roller devices and such under the power supply tightens them up, which is generally a good thing, but squishy under the tubes.
I tried Charle's CAT in my system a few yrs back. Least tubey preamp I've ever heard. Monster phono- soo quiet. So fast. Absolutely honest.
I couldnt live with the volume control steps. I'm still happy with my Audible Illusions 2, its a little more romantic, still has great slam and treble extension, but is no where near as quiet as the CAT. So you can put my opinion in that context..
Quote
I have no clue as to the age of the 10 tubes in the CAT (3 x 6922 and 2 x 12AX7 for both the phone and line sections) so a retube is in order. Open to tube suggestions - I know Jim McShane is familiar with tubes for this pre and likes EH 6922s which add a little more body than the stock Sovteks, apparently.
Mike
Yeap, The EH6922 is like the starting point visavis modern tubes. I use Sovtek LPS 12ax7 in the phono stage.
In the line stage I use TungSol 12ax7 (reissue/cryoed), with Amperex 6dj8 in the CF for a deep holographic soundstage.
I have tried the new GL6922 in both stages, but thought them too warm and syrupy in those position for my taste.
So you can actually make the CAT sound "tubey" if that is your thing.
I did eliminate the balance pot and replaced the stereo pot with mono Khozmo pots. I looked at the CAT 'Legend' for inspiration. I also put in a 10dB attenuation circuit to 'cut' the gain, and will install a toggle switch to allow toggling between full gain and -10dB., as per the Legend.
The Khozmo uses dale resistors which 'softens' the sound slightly, but I can address that in the future with more neutral resistors.
I am thinking of replacing all the electrolyte caps on the board since they are about 23+years old, and 'might' be close to retirement. But the pre is still very quiet, with just a very slight buzz on the right channel audible when you are right up close to the speaker.
Would be great to hear the CAT in your system Mike...
Martin
Good advice from everyone, thanks,
Yes, the VAC preamp was a great match for the big Cherry but the CAT just does some things that the VAC can't touch - The sense of realistic drum/symbol/percussion noises is so much better on the CAT - And these are sounds that I am very familiar with. That physical sensation of thing hitting other thing - the CAT is so clean and fast and open that it really digs deeply into the source.
And I still need to retube it anyway, so hopefully the sound will only get better.
The sound signatures from various sources are very much more similar on the VAC than the CAT - Each new album or disc sounds rally different from one another on the more-revealing, more responsive CAT.
I had an original CAT SL-1 Reference, this was the 2nd version of the CAT, must have been 20+ years old, approaching 30, with the Phono stage. Even at that age, it was still excellent.
Vic - NJAS, member is a tube expert. He did a once over and found nothing wrong.
It was musically excellent. I believe the only problem CAT had was his ability to deliver the product consistently. Still one of the best preamps out that.
I can only imagine the Ultimate is even better due to components and minor improvements.
What a prize!
Your finidings don't surprise me at all. VAC preamps have always been known to be more lush sounding while CAT has always had a more neutral presentation and as you mentioned, very fast and dynamic.
Both are very good and it only depends on what you are after in regard to presentation.
The only downfall I have experienced with VAC is a "perceived" lack of detail. I have heard VAC preamps sound very good when paired with the right system (for my taste) but again, its all in personal preference.
I haven't heard CAT gear in some time.