Need help with tube linestage-SF vs ARC vs Others


I am considering purchase of a tubed linestage to add a little body/bloom to the midrange of my all SS rig for popular, blues and rock (not metal). System is Muse 10/Muse 3 Sig/McCormack DNA500/Alon Circe. I don't want to totally give up bass definition/extension or HF extension, would strongly prefer balanced, and would like SS pass through for HT. Unfortunately the Aesthetix Calypso is currently above my budget (around $2000). Other continders are:

SF Line 3 - could always add SE upgrade later, but in stock form is it too dry/sterile, and not much different from my SS pre?

ARC LS16 MkII - How good is this unit?

ARC LS5 MkII or III - supposedly quite good, but I don't believe it has a remote or HT pass through, does it?

Line 2 SE - How good is this?

CJ 17LS or 14LS - not balanced, and possibly not very extended at the extremes.

Any others??? Thanks for the help.
mitch2
I am VERY happy with my LS 16 MKII. It is very, very good. However, how it interacts with your system is anybody's guess until you try it. It worked wonders with mine. It elevated my Maggie 3.6R's to a level I did not know they could attain. The dynamic life that the MkII allows music to express is breathtaking. A definite step in the direction of a "you are there" type of realism. If "bloom" is defined as bringing you closer to feeling the breath of living vocalists and instruments, the MkII has it in spades. If you mean a warmer, lusher, tubier, rounder, euphonic sound, no. I've heard the Calypso and I think it would give it a good run. The Calypso is also not "tubey" sounding in the traditional sense. It is simply very neutral. I wouldn't hesitate to compare them. My previous linestages included the ARC SP-14. I can't speak for the BAT or Sonic Frontiers units.
I probably should add that the other night I spun Voodoo Chile from Electric Ladyland(CD) and was simply floored during Jimi's solos. You could tell how hard he was attacking the strings on his Strat. You could even discern that it was a natural maple neck and the it screamed through the Marshall stack with the proper growl. Just like a "live" Marshall. I heard dynamic and harmonic details that I didn't know were captured on that recording. Yes, the LS-16 MkII is pretty good.
I should have mentioned that the CAT preamp does not offer balanced outputs. Also I do not believe that it offers a HT pass-through.
Thanks everyone so far,

Mthieme, how good is the Vk-30? I used to own a Vk-500, and it sounded pretty good, but sort of broke up a bit when asked to rock on complex pieces. The DNA 500 was a definite improvement. Could you elaborate on the strengths/weaknesses of the Vk-30?

Magnepanmike, I understand what you are saying about the 6922 having more bloom, but I am not looking for at 360 degree swing, just a little more bloom to the mids without sacrificing the extremes, so maybe the LS16 Mk III would do that for me, or is it totally sterile like a SS preamp? Also, can you tell me if there are any other significant weaknesses to that piece, like tube glare or harshness in the HF?

Kira, is the Modwright 9.0SE a tube preamp or SS, and does Dan have a website with information posted on this?
I have a vk3i presently, but owned the vk30 in the past and had sold it to raise some funds. BAT's tube gear seems to be where its at in their line. That said I own a vk200 and have not had any complaints to speak of, and have been thinking about the 500 so I'm interested when I hear you say that. Anyway, the VK30 has a much better complement of controls and programmable options than the VK3, more than I had use for actually. It has dual power supplies, balanced and single ended in and out and was very easy to use. I would not say that it is overly warm or syrupy if you know what I mean, but had a very good balance. Dynamics and soundstage were excellant, and I never had any problems with reliability. I can't comment on changing tubes since I never did.