AMPS- - Help ARC 200 or ARC Classic 150 or ..... I keep my ARC 100vt mkll??? I am driving the top end of the Infinity RS 1-B (EMIM/EMIT) rated at 4 ohms. Also what is the difference between the VT amps and a triode amp like the classic 150??

Any advice would be appreciated!
I used an M-300 MKII, essentially a Classic 150 to drive the top end of my Infinity Betas with great results. Unfortunately, the amps are a little long in the tooth and could begin having reliability problems. After sending one of my M-300s back to ARC twice, I bought a VT100-II.

To amswer your question, the Classic 150s will be "draw you in lucious" sounding, where the VT-100II is a bit more dynamic and detailed. The VT-200 (which I own now) falls somewhere in between. I haven't had any problems with the VT-200, but every now and then I miss the lush triode sound of the C-150.
Thanks your VT 200 a mk1 or 2? Are you familiar with the VT100 mk2?? I just wanted to get some ideas from our 'gon family before I contacted a dealer for an "in-home" demo of the vt200......
I was also courious about the classic 150 because it is a Triode and I don't know the "laymans" difference between the Triode- VT-SET etc......
Rick: Having owned the Classic 150s for a number of years, and having heard the VT 100/200s at dealers om a number of occasions, I'd have to say that the VT amps are, slightly, the more tube-like amps, in my view. The Classic 150s are great amps, no mistake, but they have a solid state input section that, while giving it terrific bass definition and control for a tubed amp, also gives just a little bit of a transistory edge to them, and while the triode mode is quite magical with vocals, it still sounded a little "bleached" (i.e., harmonically thin) to me, particularly compared to the Jadis JA 80s I replaced them with (the opposite end of the tubed spectrum, in some ways). Now that "bleached" sound I refer to is what others refer to as "high-definition", and it is an ARC house sound that has carried through to today, but the VT 100 uses a tubed input stage, I recall, and has just a little more of a tubed signature to my ears (while still high-definition, it seems a little better in terms of a fuller, richer harmonic presentation than the CL 150). I'm not sure about the VT200's input stage, but if it does use a solid state input stage it is using a nicer sounding one to me, as it too sounds more tube-like to me than my recollection of the Classic 150s. Mind you, the differences are really quite minor and I don't think you could go wrong with any of these amps, even keeping your own, but if you're going for a more classic tube presentation among ARC amps, I think the VT series would more match that description. My two cents, for what it's worth.
My VT-200 is the original with a tubed input stage. The Mark II has an FET input stage (I think). The VT-100_II which I owned previously was also a tube input stage. Rcprince is correct, the Classic 150 has a solid state input stage, but they still sounded wonderful with my Infinitys. I think it had more to do with the transformer coupling and high impedance output and less to do with the solid state input stage. If I were purchasing an amp for the Infinity panels, I'd choose the VT-200 over the Classic 150 or VT-100-II. Just my preference. It would be great fun trying them all!!!
Great comments.......guys! And to make the anxiety even higher...someone put a VT 200 on 'gon for 3K!!!! My hands are sweating!