2. amps-preamps
  3. 1123254379

VAC Ren II, VAC Phi, or ARC Ref 3?

Finally, the two cold solder joints in one of my Rowland 7M amplifiers have been fixed. Just a simple 2 minutes soldering job at home, thanks to a kind live phone consult by Jeff himself. Now the system is back purring like a kitten.
Great say you, but. . . the problem is that now I have fallen totally prey to Upgraditis Furiosa, the most pernicious and 'wife threatening' form of Audiophilia Nervosa.
I listen mostly to classical--lots of chamber, vocal, Early Music, Baroque, Romantic, some large orchestra, lots of cello and other strings--on a system that I have lovingly put together over the last 20 years: EAD T1000, AT&T glass C-core glass wire, EAD D7000 Mk. 3, AudioQuest Quartz RCA, Audio Research LS2B, Gutwire XLR, Jeff Rowland 7M monoblocks, Cardas Golden Ref PCs on 7M, Cardas Golden Ref speakerwires, MagnePan 3A speakers.
The sound is sweet, lush, with a large if slightly unfocused soundstage, sometimes slightly veiled, somewhat soft at the bottom, can sound glorious in the midrange, good if not spectacular at the top. Much better at small ensembles than at full orchestra, where the sound stage can collapse and full strings and brass often display signs of brittleness and two-dimensionality. But, so much for self-criticism. Now what to do?
I intend to migrate towards a fully balanced system, with redbook and SACD capability and a tube linestage. I will start upgrading at the source and linestage points. The source will be an Esoteric X-01 or an upcoming APL NWO-1. But in this thread I'd like to discuss options for a new linestage. My requirements are an open and detailed, sweet sound, accurate with minimal coloration, with very good but not necessarily overwhelming macro-dynamics, an excellent three-dimensional and accurate soundstage, superior microdynamics and subtle nuance. The linestage must sound great out of the box--after breakin of course: not only after going through many cycles of NOS tubes musical chairs. All of this from a company with a stellar track record and reputation in quality, dependability and pre/post sale support. I listened to the VTL 7.5 and found it to be too soft. The BAT VK51SE sounded too dark. Then I listened at length to the VAC Ren II, which seems to embody all of my requirements. I have not heard the VAC Phi as yet, but it is in the running by inference. Nor I have listened to the ARC Ref 3, although I intend to: Ref 3 is in the running by reputation.
Suggestions? Opinions? It's your turn guys and girls!
guidocorona
dgad
782 posts
 
Great post & great notes. REad the entire thing. Well worth it. I thank you for your work. Nothing compares to a listening session w. the variables being well notes. Also nothing reveals a preamps sound as well as a comparision of going direct.

I stand by what I said in an earlier post. The beauty of the coloration of tubes is what we are buying. Just how much is the question. As you indicated there was not much distance between the DCS direct or via the ARC. Both were liveable. This mirrors my experience w. my Audio Aero direct vs going via my VTL TL 7.5. Also this demonstrates the difference between a Placette line stage & a great tube linestage. I myself love my coloration of tubes. Now only to choose which color. Today they come in so many shades with any great one being great. It is all a matter of choice. It depends on your system not on what any of us post over here.
oneobgyn
410 posts
 
I still maintain, the ARC Ref 3 wins hands down. It is just no contest especially after the addition of the bypass caps and switching the output tube to a 6550C
guidocorona OP
4,298 posts
 
Dgad, I dare say that the only device I heard yesterday which I can even faintly accuse of addeing a 'coloration' was the Accuphase DP-77, if we call coloration a type of unrealistic sound we will not find in live instruments. VAC Ren Sig II, ARC Ref 3, DCS P8I going solo, all sounded different, yet real in their own special way. Even what I call 'glare'' may not be perceived as such by someone else, or even by myself with a different style of music.
Oneobgin, I will call Leonard at ARC next week and will pick his brain about the benefits of the new Ref 3 inline update. Up to now I am still unclear about what the update actually does to the sound. Yet, I do concur that between the two linestages I listened to yesterday, ARC Ref 3 was my preferred one. Running with P8I directly into the Rowland 302 sounded very different, yet it was a close second.
fsarc
148 posts
 
Great write up Guidocorona! It appaears you have a terrific understanding of the nuances of all three products.

I would have loved to see you get to listen to the Phi in the mix. I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before. Is the Phi more similar to the newer Ren II or the older Ren SigII?

Is the Ren SigII competitive with the Ref 3 or was it "no contest" as OB mentions? I find at this level it comes down to personal preference rather than one product being totally superior to another. While I prefer the sound of the Phi over the Emm DCC2 I can't say it's no contest. If I didn't have the Phi I could certainly live with the DCC2 direct.

Also, I'm sure if this would have made ANY difference in what you heard, but are you aware that the Rowland 302 uses the uncoventional pin 3 "hot" on its balanced inputs rather than the more common pin 2 "hot"?

In case I missed it somewhere, was this comparison done at a dealer or friend's house?

Given the great reputation of the ARC Ref II I'm not surprised you were so impressed with the Ref 3.

Best wishes on your final decision.

Frank
guidocorona OP
4,298 posts
 
Frank, the audition took place at a dealer. Unfortunately the Phi had been sold just a few days earlier. It is my understanding that Phi is more related to Ren II. Ren Sig II is an older design, now largely deemphasized. I have heard the Ren II a few times and actually found it to be a soundstage champion, unlike the Ren Sig II, whose soundstage is slightly smaller and two dimensional.
Because Ref 3 is a brand new design and Ren Sig II is an older withdrawn design, my comparison was a little of apples and oranges. It seems to me the newer Ren II does share some of the positive characteristics of Ren Sig: openness, frequency extension, speed. Yet I did not experience with Ren II any stage constriction of the Sig.
To me it was a matter of no-contest-personal-preference in favor of ARC Ref 3 vs the VAC Ren Sig II. Or in other words, I 'prefer' the ARC. In the context of the system I listened to, I would find the Sig difficult to live with in the long run. I do insist however using the subjective term 'prefer'. If Kevin Haze is still manufacturing the Ren Sig II as a custom order, there must be customers who value its sound immensely and likely for good reasons.
The ARC Ref 3 was for me easy to listen to.
I did not know about the 302 hot pin peculiarities. Do you have any idea what problems a pin mismatch may cause?
More to discover