Best solid state pre-amp below US $ 10.000,00 ??

Artg & John,

I am sure it did sound better. The AA sounds better via my VTL than direct. More of the tube thing going on. But the EMM sounds better via the AA as a preamp than via a Placette. Again some of the tube thing. Where I am going is try the AA as a preamp & compare it to any of your mentioned preamps. I doubt it will be as good as the Calypso but I bet it will compare. Don't use the AA as the source, use a different source into the AA & that same source into the Calypso.

I know it sounds crazy but it is all about the entire system. Unfortunately the AA direct will be more transparent no matter what you say. You have one more item in the chain. Depending on what preamp will determine how much more transparent. Now the preamp you use will add dimension, tube like sound, decay or how about some color. I bet a beautiful color too. I personally prefer the AA via my VTL than direct. But it still is less transparent (but really very very slightly & who knows how much is the cables, power cord, preamp, my ears etc). Also the VTL does not add body alone but also adds tremendous power, dynamics, decay etc. But this is all extra & wasn't there before. With the AA it helps a little. With my EMM it helps a lot & brings the EMM to another level as compared to my EMM via the Placette Active (probably the best preamp I have heard till the VTL). The Placette better my CAT MkIII by a very wide margin where a blind listening session would result in 100% certainty what you were listening to.

Do use the AA as a preamp for a different sournce and then comment(if you have that feature, as it improves the sound of the AA as a CD player substantially once the preamp upgrade is installed). I am trying to save you money or at least give you a comparative reference.

I purchased the VTL preamp as it is synergistic w. my amps & made a tremendous improvement as such. Take out the balanced connection of the VTL preamp & then the playing ground is much more close.

FrankPiet, I am curious about which VAC you have listened to. E.g. the original Renaissance--which I have not personally heard--is apparently somewhat soft, but current Renaissance II is not at all soft and is in fact dead quiet. The Ren II is not even based on the original Ren but is a cost-reengineered version of the Phi preamp. I'd be further interested in hearing more about your observations about VAC build quality. Thanks, Guido

...the AA direct will be more transparent no matter what you say. You have one more item in the chain. Depending on what preamp will determine how much more transparent. Now the preamp you use will add dimension, tube like sound, decay or how about some color. I bet a beautiful color too. I personally prefer the AA via my VTL than direct. But it still is less transparent (but really very very slightly & who knows how much is the cables, power cord, preamp, my ears etc). Also the VTL does not add body alone but also adds tremendous power, dynamics, decay etc. But this is all extra & wasn't there before.

This nicely describes what I also observe when using a tubed preamp with my APL Denon 3910 versus running the APL direct to the amplifier. I've had this discussion with Alex Peychev for a couple months. While I say using the preamp sounds better to me, he adamantly insists the APL sounds best going direct. Now, I have a new perspective on the debate. I suspect Alex is talking about transparency whereas I am talking about added body, dynamics, and dimensionality.

BTW, I'm using a lowly First Sound Presence Deluxe II...hardly an uber-preamp like the others being discussed here, but I give up very, very little in transparency, and any loss is far outweighed by the benefits.

Thanks Dgad for putting into words what I could not effectively convey.

TVAD, that is exactly what I experienced when auditioning the AA Capitol II at a dealer by itself, then through a Foundation Research V6 linestage. Slightly more detailed directly into the amp, but also slightly leaner sound than through the Foundation research. The Foundation Research added just a slight amount of richness, bloom and impact to the sound that made it more listenable. Which instantiation was closer to the original venue? Truly impossible to say. We could argue that the Foundation Research was removing details coming right out of the instrument and adding artifacts of its own, or that the Foundation Research was reproducing more faithfully the sound as already modified by the acoustic, damping, etc. . . of the venue. Who really knows?

Dgad - I fully understand what you have posted here and agree with your comments. As described above, my experiences parallel those of Tvad. And with vinyl as my primary source, driving my DAC into my amps is not really an option even if this was the "better" way to go. Indeed the final result comes down to a system, not an individual component.

The issue of "best" is always a personal thing. For one person, this could describe the ultimate extraction of information and clarity the source material has to offer. For others, it comes down to taking the listener to the performance with the portrayal of the characterizations described by Tvad.

How does inserting a tube line stage into a system so magically bring back the dimensionality of piano, sax, guitar, voice, etc.? I have no idea but I quit worrying as to the how and why. All I have to do is go upstairs and hit some piano keys to know that the audio system with the line stage far more accurately renders the characteristics of the piano than when the line stage is removed.

If the manufactured LP or CD has lost some of the dimensionality and decays of the music, and a tubed line stage, phono stage or amp helps to bring this back, with a minimal amount of lost resolution and "transparency", then for me, it is well worth the end result.

As Artg, Jadem6 and I have discussed many times, with our comparative listening sessions of many different preamps, amps, CDP's, etc., it takes a lot of effort to achieve a system balance of resolution, dynamics and dimensionality. When it comes to line stages, so far the Aesthetix Callisto Signature does this like no other I have heard. Now with Art's excitement of the Nagra, I will be eager to hear this as well.

Frankpiet: Based on the descriptions you made of the Nagra and CAT, it indeed sounds like the Janus fits right in the middle. My comment is based on my experience with the Calypso. You can only know for sure if you hear it for yourself. The Calypso build quality is quite impressive. So the Janus should be the same. These do not have the industrial look of the Callisto and Io. But these latter pieces are special in their own ways. And concerning the build quality of the CAT SL-1, I never found this to be an issue. So I am puzzled with your findings here.

John