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

FrankPiet, the Boulder 1010 and 1012 throw indeed an extremely stable and large sound stage and instrument images. While they are expensive when purchased new, Boulder seems to warrant its products almost indefinitely even when purchased 2nd hand, and their price on the used market is more reasonable, typically under 10K.

Frankpiet, I recently auditioned (twice already) the VAC (Vacuum Amplification Company) Renaissance II at a frend's place. Each session lasted approx 4 hours.
Ren II is tube-based, fully balanced, has phono stage, remote controlled. Sound is astonishingly detailed, open, sweet, tight in the bass, throws a very large three-dimensional sound stage with very accurate instrument placement. By the way it does look gorgeous and even passed my better half esthetics acceptance test. Her comment was in fact 'gorgeous!'. Lists approx 8K. What I also enjoy is that the creature sounds fantastic without having to resort to wild tube rolling.
The front plate is laquered black with a multi-layer coating that gives the surface a sense of shimmering depth. The knobs/controls are gold-color. Construction appears to be excellent. Ren II is in my own very short list of pres I am considering for my own system.
Oh yes, I was forgetting one of its most useful features is an output impedance well below 100 Ohms, which will make it easy to match it with most any amp.

With builtin phono, just like the VAC Ren II or the VAC Phi?

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

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?

Bhouser, I thought the VAC Ren 1 was derived from the Ren Sig design, while the Ren 2 was derived from the Phi.
If both VAC Ren 1 and 2 are derived from the Phi, I stand corrected.
Have you had an opportunity to listen to the Phi at all? If so, what were your impressions/findings?

Thanks Bhouser, I am sold on VAC Ren 2. All the grace of tubes without any of the tuby artifacts. Ren 2 seems also to be a differential balanced design, which for me is an advantage as I am planning to get an Esoteric X-01. Conversely, I just noticed on the NAGRA site that the NAGRA PL-l is a single ended design, and the PL-l's XLR connectors link to an 'unbalanced' circuit.

Thank you Raquel, Would you be able to characterize the sonic differences between the Ren II (not Sig) and the Phi preamps?

I am delighted you are happy FrankPiet. Does this mean you are giving up on the upcoming balanced NAGRA PL-p?

Hey guys/girls, if you wish to help me make up my mind on my next linestage (VAC REN 2, VAC Phi, or ARC Ren 3), please visit me at:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?aamps&1123254379&openmine&zzGuidocorona&4&5#Guidocorona
Thanks a bunch, Guido