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

Artg / Jafox: I´ve auditionned last night Nagra PL-P vs. CAT SL-1 Ultimate MK II. Here are my findings:
Nagra beats the CAT hands down is respect of: neutrality, imaging, focus, speed, articulation and depth of soundstage as well as air around instruments - WOW. Furthermore the Nagra is more quiet than the CAT. The onboard phono-stage is at least together with my Benz LP in a class of its own (clearly bettered the borrowed Clearaudio Basic Symmetry as well as the borrowed Pass X-Ono).. The built quality is far better than CAT which is a little poor.
The CAT has got more slam, dynamics and inner detail and a better musical flow. CAT likes my Electraglide power cords, Nagra doesn´t (to bright, dry and lean).
I don´t know were to put the AESTHETIX Janus ?? Is it in the middle ? What about the buildquality, flexibility and reliability of the Janus ?? Does it match well with Ayre power amp and Audio Aero pre ??
I´ve listened to the VAC and was not very convinced - poor built quality, audible noisefloor and rediciously expensive in Germany. CAT and Nagra were def. better.

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

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?