BAT Vk-51 SE vs Aesthetix Calypso

A few thoughts from a BAT and Aesthetix user: I prefer the BAT non-SE equipment because you can roll tubes. Perhaps Sidssp's experience of BAT gear seeming more like transister gear comes from using the SE versions. With the BAT VK31 I put in Amperex bugle boys and was quite pleased--a good platform for NOS tubes. With the VK75 I put in a couple of CBS Zylicron (sp?) from Upscale Audio, which had a nice warming effect.

I have an Aesthetix Rhea phonostage and, frankly, I don't like it. It uses Sovtex tubes, and I think that is the problem. I'm looking to do some tube rolling in it, but in reading the reports on Audiogon, it sounds like a rather complex undertaking. But, we'll see.

Granted, I'm comparing apples and oranges somewhat here, but out of the box, I preferred that BAT gear to the Rhea. Yet tube rolling can change everything...as those more experienced than I can attest to in more detail.

I chose to keep the Lamm LL2 in a head to head comparison in my system vs. the VK51SE (I owned both at the same time). I did not really care too much for the Calypso, but owned it before the other two. I believe I chose a VTL 5.5 over the Calypso, then subsequently a Tom Evans Vibe and Pulse Lithos 7. The Lamm sounds sort of similar to the Vibe, but with better bass, dynamics, clarity and top end. However, the Lamm has nowhere near the ergonomic features as the BAT or Calypso. To answer your question, based on my recollection, I would choose the VK51SE over the Calypso.

While I am partial to NAT Audio since my firm also imports the line, I would like to suggest doing some research on Plasma R or the Symmetrical preamps which will easily outperform the linestages mentioned above and the Plasma R has 10 tubes inside while the Symmetrical is configured with 12 tubes.
www.nataudio.com and www.musicalsounds.us

Good luck