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
My Ref 3 has now racked up approximately 380 hours and is sounding absolutely glorious. Interestingly enough, the sound stage did not come completely into its amazing own until past 360 hours of operation, which means just about one week ago. Prior to that, the device continued to smooth up, open up and become more detailed until approx 340 hours, at which time it decided to become rather unpleasantly edgy on a numbr of redbook CDs. Almost suddenly, past 365 hrs the problem abated, the odd etch in the higher mid treble vanished in about 5 hours of operation, and the stage and imaging bloomed rapidly into a giant, deep and transparent state. Go figure! I am not sure if the unit is completely broken in as yet. I will keep everyone posted on any further changes.

In the meantime, Marc Mickelson has posted a good if slightly technically dated two-part review of the ref 3 on SoundStage. He inaccurately lists one of the tubes in the Ref 3's power supply as the 6L6GC of the first production run, instead of the current 6550C. Please see:
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/arc_reference3/
and
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/arc_reference3/index2.html
Makes me wonder if he reviewed a pre or post rolling update unit. Does anyone know?
As the subscribers to this thread may have read my ramblings about my X-01--albeit willy nilly--and some of my favorite power chords, I thought you'd be interested in a listening comparison of the Shunyata Anaconda Helix VX and Anaconda Helix Alpha power chords on Babybear's X-01 Limited connected to his fab system. I'll see you all on "A Tale Of . . . Two Anacondas" at:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1146623467&openfrom&1&4#1
where you will have the unadulterated displeasure of following all my latest rants. Guido
Last Monday I had the opportunity of doing a comparative audition at some length of my Ref 3 with a JRDG Capri preamp on my system. My admittedly preliminary findings are intriguing, and can be read at:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?aamps&1200110667&openfrom&22&4#22
See you there! Guido
The whole break-in, burn-in period is a matter of confussion for me. It is not that I don't believe that it can logically make sense, but I also do believe it is partially the listener being broken into the sound of the new equipment. More to the point is how can one listen to a higher end piece of equipment at most dealers and declare such a piece so superior. In way too many cases, dealers have equipment for demonstration that is no where close to the completed break-in period - either manufacturer recommended or real.

I base this on the fact that I have purchased several pieces of demo equipment from dealers (all across the country). In virtually every case, the dealer reported and my personal contacting of the manufacturer of the piece with serial number in hand confirmed that each piece ranged in actual age of between 4 - 10 months. In every single case, the selling dealer warned me that the piece had very limited hours and would need virtually the entire break-in period. This means that they were trying to sell rather expensive equipment based on auditions of "not ready for prime time" components based on the recommended break-in periods.

Why wouldn't the manufacturer require dealers to properly break-in their equipment prior to issuing customer auditions - after all listening to a component when it is not broken in should result in a poor audition and turn customers away from the product.
Post removed