Aesthetix Calypso vs. ?


I have this on loan from my dealer, and am wondering what other preamps I should try within this price range.

I think the Calypso betters my BAT 3iX, without the 3iX's somewhat closed in on top and darkish midrange.

The 3iX does seem to win in the midbass, and I still very much like the its overal soundstage presentation. I'm wondering if I should try some tuberolling with the 3iX before I give up on it. I just have the standard Electro-Harmonix 6922s in it right now.

(I tried some Tung Sol 12AX7s I had in the closet in the Calypso. Lovelier midrange and deeper soundstage than the Sovteks, but too much hiss).
daverz
Thanks, Mitch.

* I would prefer balanced or at least an XLR output, since my amp is XLR only, but I'm not doctrinaire on that point.

* I'm leaning toward tubes, but want mostly want to avoid a lean or dry sound.

* A passive would have to offer at least two inputs, since I still listen to records.

* The input impedance of my amp (a BAT VK-250) is 100K Ohm.
I thought the Calypso sounded good but lacked dynamics. I preferred and use the PCA-2 by PS Audio.
Ok. None of those I listed above have balanced ins or outs. That is my problem also.
I owned a Calypso,then an Audio Horizons tube line stage which noticeably bettered the Calypso in my system.Others may have different opinions.The AH also has XLR connectors for CD and pre out in addition to rca.AH also offers a free home trial.
The Calypso has a really pretty minimalist circuit design. You are in a sense listening to the tubes. Which is amazing with good tubes but make using low noise / low microphonic tubes mandatory.

One thing you can try with Tung Sols is change the gain on the Calypso to the low setting. Its in the manual and just involves a set of jumpers on the main board (unplug it!). Large reduction in noise for me.

A set of reasonably priced NOS 6922's (seimans 1960s) may be worth trying in the Bat and you could always use them in the Calypso if you go that way.