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
guidocorona OP
4,298 posts
 
Oneobgin, system synergy and personal preferences always play a major role. I am wandering if perhaps you have auditioned the original Anacondas, rather than the new Helix Anacondas. The new ones sound significantly different than the old one, and I very much prefer them. Unless you have tested the Helixes in the last 45 or 60 days, I suspect you likely heard the old series. Mind you, you may still like your Valhallas better, yet Helix are worth a careful examination.
My personal findings are in the URL listed in my previous post.
oneobgyn
410 posts
 
It was the original Anacondas.
guidocorona OP
4,298 posts
 
Sounds good OneObgin. Please let us all know if you get an opportunity to listen to the new Helix series. Likewise I will post any further findings on Valhalla.
oneobgyn
410 posts
 
No problem---but with all due respects I will hang on to my Valhalla
guidocorona OP
4,298 posts
 
The Feb 2006 issue of TAS features a review of the ARC Ref 3 linestage and ARC Ref 210 mono blocks. The devices are compared to the much more expensive $19,000 MBL 6010 D pre- amp and $73,500 9011 monoblock amps. According to the reviewer, the MBL gear excels in detail, decay on 'sostenuto' and ultimate transient response. while the ARC products excell in size/solidity of stage, ambient realism and decay, tonal color and accuracy, tonal balance, neutral background. Remarkably good (massive authority) in bass control and transient response for tube gear.
"The MBL gear reproduces the transient slap of the duo's voices as it bounces back toward the listener off the rear wall more distinctly than the ARC does—more distinctly than anything else I've tried. But the ARC combo reproduces the way their voices trail away toward the rear wall with the same magical continuousness that it shows when reproducing the decays of notes. Both presentations are kind of amazing. And which products you will prefer will depend, to some extent, on whether you value astonishing clarity and transients or astonishing durations and tone colors.
effect is awe-inspiring. . ."

I have not heard the MBL gear so I can't comment directly on it, but I concur with Jonathan Valin assessment on the Arc Ref 3 behavior in tonal color, stage, imaging and decay. As for bass authority and transient speed, for my particular taste, the Ref 3 is just correct, and any more of these would be excessive and unwelcome.
Finally, Jonathan Valin is somewhat guilty of comparing apples and oranges: he should have used the ARC Ref 610 current flagships to compare against his MBL benchmark, not the 210.
More to discover