2. amps-preamps
  3. 1191384860

BAT Preamps, why such polarized opposite opinions?

I've never heard a BAT preamp. But I've heard enough about them on this and other sites. What is it about their sonics that people either tend to really like or really dislike them?

I've heard criticisms that they lack air, treble openness, life. I've been told the VK32SE is too dark, too weighted to the bottom, no air or delicacy on top.

I've heard these polarized opinions from audio salesmen as well, some who carried (carry) BAT. Let's just say I made alot of long distance calls to get a broad opinion.

But others love their sound and think they are fabulous.

I know what you're going to tell me - go listen to them yourself. Well, I live rural and it isn't easy to do.

So, instead, I'd like to get opinions across the spectrum from the Audiogon guys.

I'm using a Audio Research 100.2 with Dali Helicon 400's. I've tried Rogue, ARC, Sonic Frontiers, but haven't found the right preamp yet.
audiosoul
glai's avatar
glai
442 posts
 
The presentation of the 51se does change a lot with different power cords. It was muted with shunyata and audience PCs but great with SR, Harmonix stuff.

ARC is slightly better with textures and bass. The ARC makes the soundstage much bigger than every preamp I have had. It is probably not very accurate in this effect but I find it enjoyable. Bat is a more direct and faster sounding amp. Bat has more useful features if you switch betw vinyl and CD.

Amp pass x350.5, vac phi 110, mcintosh 275, avalon diamonds, quad 2805
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
it is better not to buy any component based upon opinions.

if you can't audition a component before you buy it, don't buy the component. if necessary drive or get on a plane, especially if it is an expensive component.

some manufacturer's are flexible. they may make an arrangement with a dealer to shp a component to you, or in rare cases, ship the component to you.

i realize the stock and trade of audiogon is opinions.
no opinion can predict your preference or dislike for a component. i think too much value is given to opinions.

well-intentioned advice about the sound of components as well as opinions about the sound quality of preamps, amps, speakers and cd players is a poor substitute for personal experience.
elberoth2's avatar
elberoth2
1,219 posts
 
From my expirience (I owned BAT 51SE for over 2 years) BAT is thick, slow and veiled. This is a typical BAT sound to me - I have tried severeal BAT components (VK30, VK-500, VK-150SE) and they all have this sonic signature. ARC Ref 3 on the other hand sounds open, fast and transparent. It is not brgight or thin byany means - just right.

I have also to agree with Mr tennis opinion here - If I were you, I would arrange a demo, even If I had to travel outside your town/state.
audiosoul OP
16 posts
 
Thick, slow, veiled -- YUCH!

Your description of BAT's sound mirrors what a number of others think as well.

With no disrespect intended, I have to question those posters who find none of this to be the case. I cannot believe that so many find BAT to be thick, slow, veiled, airless, and that they are all wrong! They can't all have the same equipment giving BAT this sound. It has to be characteristic of BAT's sound. There is no other logical answer.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
perceptions are subjective. what is thick, slow and veiled to some is natural sounding to others.

i have heard bat systems at dealers and ces shows. i owned a bat vk d5. bat gear is not slow, thick or veiled. it is very clear, transparent and highly detailed.

i have several witnesses who can corroborate my observations.

it has nothing to do with logic.

many so-called audiophiles are so accustomed to a little extra energy in the upper frequences, i.e., 1000 hz and up.

when a stereo system does not have such a presentation, it may be perceived as slow. it's all opinion and subjective.

asking for opinions about the sound of components is a waste of time.
More to discover