Audio Research VT80SE amp vs Prima Luna EVO 400 or 300

I sent my ARC SP 16 and VT 80 SE back to ARC for service.  One of my concerns was a hum from the VT 80 SE amp.  ARC logged 200 inspection hours on the VT 80 SE and stated that nothing was wrong with either component.  ARC acknowledged the hum and stated if I use a balanced preamp the hum would be eliminated.  I am able to enjoy my system but when the music is not playing the hum is present.  ARC did an excellent job removing scuffs from the faceplates.  Also, after the service the SP 16 phono tube rush was significantly decreased.  Great sound and set and forget simplicity.  Good luck with your search!

I have never had the pleasure of hearing any Prima Luna gear but it looks well made and people really dig it. I have used ARC pre amps for year and love them. I hate to admit that they get even better going up the line. I do think I am content now, but the ARC stuff is good. I know this doeant really help...but I have never had one issue with ARC gear. It seems to be Bullet proof.

What setting do you prefer with your current MFA's?

Ultralinear (sp?) or triode.

If triode you may be open to lower powered (< 60 watt) tube amps with beefier power supplies.

DeKay

Obviously, the only true way to tell how they sound is to demo them. in your system. If this can't be done, at least compare what each amp has to offer. The Evo series offers balanced inputs and a remote that lets you switch between triode and ultra- linear operation. The Evo can also serve as a mono block should you decide to upgrade to more power. It also offers auto biasing and "bad tube" indicator circuitry. These are all features that may or may not be important to you but at least are worth considering. Both amps are well built with quality components and neither is likely to disappoint, but again, the real test is how they sound in your system.

J.Chip

OP — I went from a Prima Luna HP Dialogue Premium integrated to an ARC 160S amp and REF 6SE preamp.  Never regretted that.  I concede it’s not a fair comparison to start with, but I still use my PL in another room and I’ve obviously made my own mental comparisons (room differences and associated equipment, again, make it an unfair comparison).  Subject to all those caveats: I prefer the ARC house sound.  Clear, liquid, bloomy, transparent, just the right dose of fleshiness.  Not even remotely syrupy or rolled off.  In fact I hesitate to even put those words in the same paragraph as “ARC.” Grip and authority might only be a B+ to a bunch of A+ attributes, but those weren’t high points for the PL, either.  When I went from an earlier tube integrated to the PL, the PL seemed awfully neutral for a tube amp.  A smidge chilly.  Sometimes not the kind of neutral I wanted.  Sometimes fantastic.  But in a battle between my mood and the amp, my mood always won.  So I tried SS for a year (BHK monos with BHK pre — yes, yes, I know they have tubes on the input stage, but that’s not relevant here).  Popped the PL back in and remembered that it does create that dimensionality-plus, levitating sound you only get from tubes.  Intent on a return to tubes, ARC entered my scene and I was smitten.  Fell hard for that sound and added a REF40 / REF75SE / Harbeth 30.2 system in my office.  ARC stuff can win over my ears even when they’re in a bad mood.  That was 18 months ago, so time may change my views.  YMMV.