I have a very different take on the CAT vs. ARC than Bozo. But then again, that is no surprise as I have not had much in common with anybody with orange hair. 8-)
It's very difficult if not downright impossible to make any blanket statement about the sound of ARC preamps or amps as there has been no consistency or evolving refinements to an existing "house" sound here. I owned the Classic 60 and Classic 150s and these were very non-romantic. These amps can often sound analytical, forward, and in fact downright fatiguing....even in the context of an all-ARC setup. The ARC VT130 was a different beast altogether with incredibly full and rich midrange to die for. The bass was lacking the ultimate extension and control and the top end was not as resolving of low-level information, but this amp was incredibly musical. When I heard it compared to the VT100, the VT100 was much more tonally coherent but lacked the musical involvement for me. And fortunately, the VT100 did not have the "faults" of the Classic series. I would think that the VT200 which is essentially a bigger brother to the VT100 would have nearly identical sonics to the VT100. The VT130 (along with the VT150s) was indeed a more tubey sounding amp with its portrayal of dimensionality that it predecessors and successors simply did not have.
I have since gone through Counterpoint NPS400 (awesome amp) and Wolcott monos to now owning a pair of CAT JL-3 Signature amps. The CAT amps are NOT IN ANY WAY a romantic sounding tube amp. Their strengths include dynamic contrasts like few other amps (ss or tube) can do and they handle the leading edge of the notes with clarity and speed like few other amps as well. But tonally, they are rather flat in that they do not portray a fuller-than-life midrange (upper or lower) to bring on a "warmth".
The CAT amps are an awesome match with the Sounlab speakers as the resolution of each shows the capability of the other.
John
