Any Comparisons between VTL 7.5 & ARC Ref 3

Scousepasty -> sure you shouldn't buy anything without listening first. But then, you are not able to listen to everything on the market. Good reviews can serve as pre-filters.

Funny thing that you mentioned that you found ARC better than CJ ACT 2. That is EXACTLY what MC did himself in the next issue. So I do not really get your point here.

I do not want to defend MC work. IMO it defends itself and anyone who knows his work back from HiFi News times, knows that. Because even there he was curageous enough to write a bad review of Wilson Audio speakers (himself beeing an owner of X-1 at the time) or Krell (again - Krell KPS20 owner at the time).

Show me a bad review of any big name in JA, MF or ST writing.

BTW -I'm from Poland and I do not know MC personally.

MC also so gave bad reviews to several ARC products namely the VT200 or was it the VM200?? as well as one of ARC's lower rangte pre amps, which ARC re-designed after his review.

The only brand that I have never seem MC give a bad review to is cj.

Elberoth, Fremer also gave a bad review for that amp as well. Fremer has also given a bad review for the top of the range Audio Physic speaker, so telling everyone here that the so called commercial magazines does not give bad reviews is a little misleading.

Mark Mickelson from soundstage was the ONLY reviewer to bring up the serious issues the VTL 7.5 has with tube gain hiss/noise. Use any power amp with over 29db of gain and you are faced with HUGE amounts of tube hiss. Absolutely stupid to design a so called reference pre amp with this issue. OK if you run it with VTL amps only.

Elberoth, I was trying to give a counter view to the HI-FI Critic mag, which you said you strongly recommended. I live in the UK and would not pay the price they are asking for this mag, whose only justification is because 'it has no adverts'.
I used to subscribe to HiFi+ and gave that up when it became just full of RG's reviews and I came to the realisation that one guy cannot review everything thoroughly. I have been reading hi-fi mags since the '70's and have took note of what many reviewers including MC have to say, when selecting equipment to audition - after all they hear a lot more equipment than you or I.
I have read some sharp critism of equipment by JA, etc, so they do give some bad reviews. The only subscription I have at the present is with Stereophile because I find it good value for the cover price but their recorded music reviews are few generally and poor.
Good point about CJ stuff being SE, one of the reasons I rejected it from my system.

I just bought the newest BAT preamp VK 52se and could not be happier. I am using it with a new Krell EVO 402 amp and it is dead quiet. I could write all day about the imaging, dynamics, detail, etc. but in truth the thing just makes all the music sound more like music. It ain't the prettiest thing but it sure sounds gorgeous. My previous pre was the Pass x-1 and this is a wonderful upgrade.

I just ran the VTL 7.5 mkII into & out of my Nordost Thor. The difference is subtle very very subtle. I can keep driving myself crazy or just listen to music. Contrary to Billbench's experiences with the MkI, the MkII does benefit a tiny bit from the Thor in my system. I find power conditioners to be very system dependant. Maybe even more about where you live and your power supply. Once again the difference is tiny. I find the treble to be a little cleaner sounding when using the Thor. A slight increase in body. In that same comparison, I find the the Preamp is a little more laid back with the Thor. More immediate without. Less body and less relaxed without. Or in a different way, more dynamic without. But this is really spliting hairs. In a blind test it would be hard to hear. I am using an Elrod Power cord in this comparison.