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
 
Guidocorona,

Let me define coloration as anything that changes the signal our sound from the source. This means that if the CD is bright & your preamp is not and you result w. a balanced sound your equipment is still colored.

Uncolored. A bright CD player sounds bright or unchanged after placing a preamp in the path.

Now in terms of your post please allow me to quote you w. some comments;

"Removing Preamplifier from the system. Now running DCS directly into the Rowland 302. Volume controlled on DCS attenuator.
Slightly lighter sound than with ARC Ref 3.
Still truly gorgeous. Lots of 3D stage.
Still extremely liquid.
May be not as warm as with ARC Ref 3. Still beautiful.
No great congestion even in FF."

I would presume the less warmth going direct means the ARC is "coloring the sound". I would also agree it is a beautiful color that we can call extremely musical & maybe just a musical. But I would submit to you that warmth is a form of color that I myself love in the moderate amounts, but yet feel it is a departure from the sound of hte source - the DCS rig.

"Dvorak Quintet 2nd movement:
Stage almost as great as with ARC.
Touch less player's breathing than on ARC after optimization?
Touch less body in mid strings.
Greater sense of completeness, 3D, imaging than on VAC Ren Sig II
Perhaps slightly less involving, than with ARC Ref 3, but would live with it happily.
Still sounds right.
Incredibly clean. ARC has an edge on involvement. Pure DCS has an edge on clarity.
Piano arpeggios with lots of overtones."

DCS has an edge on clarity to me means that you lost clarity by entering the ARC Ref 3 into the equation. In addition the ARC edge on involvement basically says the same thing.

I submit that any tube preamp and additional interconnect combination will add body, remove slight detail (maybe ever so slight) and possibly allow you to be more involved in the music.

Is it worth the money is a question I had great issues resolving before I took the plunge. Now I am very happy with my decision.

Enjoy all that you do.
guidocorona OP
4,298 posts
 
Dgad, concerning coloration, you make a good point. Yes, strictly speaking any alteration of the source signal may be deemed a coloration, and is often referred to as such.
Yet, 'any' is far too open ended a word, thus the term coloration starts assuming a meaning which is far too broad for its own good or its own usefulness.
That is why, I prefer to restrict the term 'coloration' to denote only a type of usually subtle sonic distortion, which, while not necessarily jarring per se, or even displeasing, nevertheless yields an instrumental timbre which cannot be typically heard from live instruments. Hence in all fairness, the only device which, in my view, added a just slightly 'artificial' coloration, among the four tested during the session, was the Accuphase DP-77. Or should we call this a 'discoloration'? It sounded to me as if instrumental voices were generated by an extremely high quality FM music synthesizer.
Now concerning DCS detail with and without the ARC Ref 3 in the loop. This was in fact very difficult to decide. While in about 70% of places there was perhaps the slightest increase of low level detail when Ref 3 was not in the loop, in the remainder I could hear slightly more detail with the ARC Ref 3 in the system, such as more distinct breathing from the players.. Let us also consider that the DCS P8I was assisted by the Kimber KG4 power chord , while the ARC Ref 3 was at a disadvantage, being powered through its stock power chord. . . or was it? (chuckles!)
dgad
782 posts
 
Guidocorona,

I agree with your assesment based on your definition. In that regard I would also say that the addition or removal of any top shelf preamplifier (top shelf is open to debate) will yield similar results. And to be honest is isn't very easy to diagnose in an A B test comparison. It is more appropriately evaluated via long term listening. The truly toughest test of all.

Now to throw in a new caveat, in my system any movement of the cables at all between equipment requires usually about a week for them to settle in & achieve the most listenable state. Oh, this gets so complicated. I have other friends who have mentioned the same experiences. I would strongly suggest that the Kimber did benefit in some way, but maybe not to its best ability. Also the latest generation of DCS equipment is highly regarded. I am an EMM fan & haven't heard the latest generation of DCS equipment. I have heard most of my previous equipment in multiple systems. Each time liking the overall system & finally deciding on a purchase. This included the EMM gear, Audio Aero, Wilson Watt Puppy 7s, & the VTL 7.5s. Mind you not my 750s, but I used to own the 100s years ago to great enjoyment. I also have heard Kharmas multiple times & found them dynamically limited each time and have heard Accuphase finding it to still sound "digital".

Is the ARC Ref 3 a great product. I am sure it is. I am looking forward to hearing it. I have heard ARC many times & highly recommend it. I ultimately feel the ARC house sound as well as many other top flight products have moved to much more neautral with a slight addition of maybe fullness or body to the sound. I remember loving the ARC Classic 60 on some ML speakers (If I remember right). I still want a Classic 60 sweetness in a second system for the fun of it.

The most fun of this hobby is the search & the reward after the search is over. Whatever you purchase should give you immense pleasure, should be synergistic with your system and keep you happy for a long time. Enjoy.
guidocorona OP
4,298 posts
 
You are right DGAD, it is in fact terribly difficult to choose equipment in a single A/B test. I do not trust the process completely myself. As you read, there was to start with an unevenness of power chords. Everything was moving every few minutes by necessity. The room was full of obstacles that were playing havoc with sound. We may even have had some phase problems for all we know.
That is why I am so terribly anal about this business and intend to do some more A/B listening before I make a final decision. If possible at all I will also borrow some equipment for auditioning on my own system.
In the end I will have to live with whatever decision I make for a significant amount of time. . . as I'd like to stay married (chuckles!), so I have to make absolutely sure I will truly enjoy my choice for the LOOOONG run.
By the way, have you or anyone else had any experience with the Accuphase flagship player--the DP-100/DC-101 combo? Larry Diaz at High End Palace swears by it. But I have the concern that given its age, and the still digital nature of the sound on the newer DP-77, it may suffer from some of the same artificial coloration or relative lack of body.
dgad
782 posts
 
Guidocorona,

I have only hearsay on the DP-100/DC-101 combo. I have been told that the Single box units are significantlly better. I have not been so impressed with any Accuphase digital gear in multiple listening sessions. Mind you, none of the listening sessions were ideal, but one was in a friends house. I am a big EMM fan. I just can't get over how great the performance of SACD is w. the EMM setup. Listening right now & it is so very smooth & dynamic. I just can't pick it apart.
More to discover