Well, I could not leave well enough alone. I got the Placette Active Linestage and it is unquestionably better than the passive - it took very little time to hear the improvement. That being said, the passive RVC is superb, good enough that I sold my CAT SL1 after hearing it. So we are talking very good to great in moving from one to the other.
I believe that the Placette RVC is working in the context of a very suitable system for a passive pre. I have high out put from the source, low input impedance and high input sensitivity with the amp (CAT JL2), and short runs of very low capacitance ICs (Cardas GR). In other words the RVC is in an environment where it should work ideally[?].
The RVC and the Active share many traits - quiet dark backrounds, transparency and clarity, good separation of instruments, air between instruments with no etching of images, beautiful natural mids.
The active is simply more alive and present - more real. With even deeper, better defined, more realistic bass and more detail and presence in the highs (drum cymabls for example). It has better micro and macro dynamics. Given the choice, I can't imagine anyone not prefering the active.
Now the RVC is $1000 and the Active is $5000. This makes the RVC a truly outstanding value. It was good enough for me to sell a very (rightfully) respected tube preamp (CAT SL1). The active is an excellent value as well. In the high end, we can't get into issues of deminishing returns - only you can decide if a certain level of improvment is "worth it" - as long as you have the budget to buy what you prefer. If funds were limited, I would have no hesitation using the RVC. If you can afford the Active, it is better, plain and simple IMHO. I would imagine that if Placette Active sold through dealers (they offer a 30-day trial period) would sell for $10,000 - and it would still be worth it, because it is the best preamp I have heard (others I have owned ARC LS 25, Lamm LL2, CAT SL1 Ultimate)and I don't have to worry about tube rotation, degradation, and heat (no transistor edge or glare either).
So in the final analysis it may or may not be the passive versus active design approach that made RVC so appealing to me; it just may be that Guy Hummel has designed a volume-control that is transparent and free of distortion common to most other preamplifiers I have heard. Is it the BEST? There is no BEST - but it is certainly a series of preamplifers worth considering.
