The latest issue of Stereophile has a review of the Rhea in which the author takes quite a bit of time comparing it to the Io. I think it was written by Paul Bolin, check it out.
Aesthetix Rhea vs. Io Signature
Having read most of the posts re: the Aesthetix Io (both with and w/o signature and dual power supply upgrades), I think I understand its excellence, yet have not auditioned it. However, I'd like to keep things fairly simple from a heat/maintenance/no.of boxes/cost standpoint. Thus, my interest in the Rhea. Would those of you who have experience with the Rhea vs. the Io comment as to the distinctions. The concern I have is how much body, weight and richness of soundstage is sacrificed vs. the Io (let's assume with single power supply, signature version).
7 responses Add your response
I have seen the Rhea but not seriously auditioned it. I have heard it, and it does sound good, but can't comment on the specific A-B. One thing I will say, though, is that the IO produces a stunning amount of heat. I had always heard that tube gear produces a lot of heat - I've got a Counterpoint SA-11, so I have a pretty good idea! - but just sitting next to the rack holding a 3-box IO and the preamp (Castillo, I think) was an eye-opening experience. |
Albert has commented on the new Aesthetix Saturn series of preamps, but without a specific comparison to the Io, in an earlier thread: http://audiogo5.iserver.net/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1060711017&openusid&zzAlbertporter&4&& |
I own both an IO (NOT a signature version) and a phono stage custom-built for me by Kevin Carter at K&K Audio. In my system, the K&K holds its own with the IO and bests a number of other phonostages to which I did comparisons (at 1/2 to 1/3 the cost in some cases). I am in the process of writing an overdue review of this phonostage which I plan to post within the next couple of days. |