Parasound Halo JC2


Hello Guys,

Anyone here listened the preamp. Parasound Halo JC2?
I just bought a pair monoblocks Parasound Halo JC1 , I 'll have at home within 20 days , and I'm very curious about the differences of JC2 compared to my Pass Labs X1 preamp.
Which is better .. driving two JC1s?
Unfortunately I can't listen here this JC2 and make comparisons so I'm asking tou you..

Thanks in advance for your Opinions & Suggestions

Curio
curio

Showing 2 responses by gbmcleod

I had a JC-2 for a nearly a month.

I found that, out of the box, the preamp had high resolution, and sounded musical, but it was, for me, too lightweight in the midbass through lower midrange, which resulted in a presentation that was thinner than I liked. Frequency-wise, it had, from what I could discern, extended highs, great midrange, etc.
However, I simply couldn't get past the ethereal nature of its' sound. I prefer a more solid sound, sort of the different between Scotty beaming you up to the Enterprise and the first 5 seconds, where you can see through Cap'n Kirk, and the final 2 seconds where he's fully materialized.
On the checklist: good low-level resolution and dynamics, wide soundstage, depth good, but layering (with this setup not fantastic .....although I suspect the Usher 718s (NOT the BE version!) are no Sound Dynamic RTS-3s in the depth layering department. Overall, I enjoyed the JC-2, but it just didn't make my heart skip a beat, except for one cut on the Magical Mandarin, in a flute solo (cut 5, I think), which was lovely. I hoped it would, so I was disappointed.
In all fairness, my Hurricanes were not behaving well, and they are being repaired. However, the lightness of the sound was evident, and inarguable. One thing the Hurricanes are NOT is lightweight-sounding. Oh, the CD players were the Apollo Rega and Cambridge (also a bit lighweight, so this, no doubt, exacerbated the experience) The resolution was on a par with a First Sound Presence Deluxe Mk II, but the "bloom" just wasn't there, as it was with the First Sound, nor were the dynamics as powerful. Sound didn't blossom as much as I'd hoped -- and man, was I ever hoping it would.
Take this as an impression. I'm sure JV's review on TAS (the reason I bought it), was spot on. I agreed with all his observations, just that he de-emphasized how lightweight it could be. But then, he was using a Walker turntable, which, if anything like the Valid Points, which solidify and focus sound, would hardly demonstrate this problem. With the Cambridge, Valkyrja interconnects, the JC-2, the combination leaned too far in the "white" sound direction. The Hurricanes, bless their hearts, did not disguise that, neither did the Transparent speaker cable or the Usher, that combination being quite the opposite: weighty and solid.
I think Mr. Atkinson said about the same thing in his Stereophile review which you can read online...
Frankly, I'D like to hear someone else's take on it.
As Audiobrooke kept his unit, he may have a clearer sense of the unit's performance.
I would, however, point out that the Presence Deluxe is not exactly a "tube unit" in the traditional sense. It is more akin to a solid-state unit in its presentation, having less sweetness than the average tube unit. It is precise in the same way that the Parasound is, but less weighty nonetheless.

Jonathan's review, by the way, did not differ from Atkinson's, I think. they simply phrase differently. Jonathan clearly said it sounded like an "...ever so slightly less three dimensional ARC Reference 3..." This is usually a function of the midbass to lower midrange energy. By the way, one can easily post at the avguide website and ask him directly. The reviewers are very good at responding to queries.

Now, what COULD make the difference is the front end, and whether it is CD or turntable. Turntables will usually have a greater "density" of sound than CDs, excluding players of high lineage (and price). He DID, after all, use the Walker turntable.
I'm sure it's a great unit.