BAT to BAT - What's Best?

Jim, nothing to be ashamed of, I wish I had your discipline. Many times I've found out that better isn't better after all.....it's just different.

FWIW, I would be surprised if you found the VAC Renaissance MK II superior. I had one and wasn't overly impressed. I guess it could have been system synergy though. You might notice a bit more air in the high's, but you'll lose the dynamic drive in the bass. This might be what you're after though, only you know.

trust me, I'm way past shame. Not even a big part of my venacular.

That's right... you did have one, but your's had some problems. Maybe the sound was affected in some subtle way also? regardless, that's NOT what I want really.

I want two things from the newer pre... remote flexibility and more sonic integrity. better in imaging, more fleshed out images, and more colorful with of course better tonal accuracy. And less user interaction.... being a bit hard of seeing and havving a tube pre with eight gazillin tubes probably wasn't the best idea I ever had either... but it sure seemed so at the time.

Naturally the 'sonic improvements' I seek (more old school tube sound), may well only come via adding a tube amp... instead but I really would like to improve upon the level of flexibility as all I have just now is volume control. Fine actually, if the pre wasn't in another room all together.

...adding a tube amp for the top end would be the least expensive path... but then no flexibility increase. Hmmmm.

...and you weren't too thrilled with the VK51SE either, huh?

I guess there could have been some sonic problems on my VAC Ren mk II, but I also had a VAC Avatar Super, and I would say the overall house sound was the same. Very refined and polite, lots of air were the positives. I think the VAC's were the best high's I've heard from tubed products. Plenty of detail and air, but no sign of grain. Overall I preferred the BAT VK-51SE over the VAC and a CJ Premier 16LS mk II. The CJ and the VAC sounded a bit more 'tubey' with a warmer midrange, and if this is your cup 'o tea, they might be for you.
To date the BAT VK-51SE is still the best preamp I've heard in my home. It was much more dynamic, powerful and lively than the CJ or the VAC. The soundstage is also much larger with the BAT. I've also heard a VK-5i, like yours, and again, the VK-51SE is more dynamic and powerful, but the VK-5i is a bit sweeter in the mid's. IMHO, the VK-5i has the midrange glory of the CJ and the VAC. Of these three, I would say the CJ has the best midrange, the VAC the best highs, and the BAT the best bass. I also still think your BAT would have a bigger soundstage as well.
I sold the VK-51SE for economic reasons, to date, I still haven't heard a better preamp. I've heard preamps that better it in certain areas, but not as a whole.
That being said, I do hope to hear a ARC Ref 3 someday, as I've heard many great things about this preamp.

John... whoa! that sure shed some light on things for me. I do trust your judgement. I do dig the mids I have now. Extremely enjoy the grand Ss too... one that can, envelope you at times depending upon the recording. there's not much of the sound the 5i makes with how it's configured presently, that I don't like... and of course it's in conjunction with the BAT vk500 which also emulates something of a tube sound but with more authority and strength.

I do appreciate the info on the "Super" as well. that was another notion. Perhaps a previous CJ might be more to my prefferences. Most of the tubes I have now will fit there as well.

Do all the CJs make a racket when the volume is adjusted? The new ones do. I dig the silent .5db volume increases of the BATs. Maybe the 51 is the ticket as I would hate to lose the midrange I enjoy now. I sure didn't care much for the CT6 I heard... or the 14 either. too solid statey... and both were with tube amps... the CT 6 (or maybe a 5, 7995.00) had the newest CJ 160 wpc? tube amp and some plannar speakers. Sure it was nice... but lacked body and warmth. Not worth my 19K for sure.

I'll make every effort to hear a 51se before I buy another pre. It makes sense... and there'd be no need for tube rolling with a vk51se... that's a big plus for me. i scare myself everytime I swap out tubes in my pre. thankfully, I've stumbled onto a really super mix of tubes now... so changing them out is no longer neceassary.

I'll definitely try to hear a 51se somehow or other.

Well Jim, from what I've read from you in the past, I think you would prefer your VK-5i. It is warmer than the VK-51SE. BAT in general is more dynamic and powerful than the CJ's and VAC's, I think the answer lies in the bigger power supplies. That said, the VK-51SE uses the 6H30 'Super-tube', which may or may not be super, depending on your cup 'o tea. There is no doubt that the 6H30 tube is more dynamic, powerful and just sounds larger than the 6922's, however, it's not for everyone. If you do not like the newer CJ's that use the 6H30, you may not like the newer BAT's that use them either. The older 6922 tube does have a sweeter midrange. The CJ Premier 16LS mk II I had was a 6922 based preamp, it was second from the top of the line (Art 2) and listed for around $8500 new. I didn't notice it making a racket when the volume was adjusted though.

The VK-51SE had better dynamics and bass than any preamp I've heard, period. Not just better than any tube preamp, but better than Krell, Levinson, Classe, Threshold or any SS contender. The VK-51SE midrange is definitely tubed, and best all SS preamps I've heard in this regard, but I have heard warmer, sweeter mid's in tubed preamps. However, the other tubed units don't have the rhythmic drive and power that I love from the BAT. The BAT is also the soundstage king. One thing that may interest you about BAT is that your VK-5i has 5881 tubes in the power supplies. BAT got away from tubes in the power supplies with the 50SE and then the 51SE. Well BAT is just releasing it's new preamps, VK-32SE, VK-52SE/Rex, the difference? Tubes are now back in the power supply.
Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmm.........

One current preamp that sounds like it may fit your budget and sonics, and fill your remote flexibility requirements is an Aesthetix Calypso. Have you considered this model? I would love to hear one, as it has garnered unbelieveable reviews from Stereophile and TAS. On top of that I've heard it's the real deal from those whose ears I trust. I have never heard anything negative about it's sonics. The only complaints are that it can be tough on tubes and tube rolling is not easy. At $4500 list price it probably cannot be beat for sound and flexibility. Many say that you have to spend twice the price to better it.

John