Amplifier considerations, PrmaLuna EVO 400 versus ARC Reference 160 S. Is ARC worth it?

@ football I have owned VTL and Zesto amps in the past. Both are premium brands based in California and built in the US. Neither are with me today because as good as they sounded. They could not hold up to the demands I placed on them. Which is about 6 - 8 hours of use per day. I have had the PrimaLuna amps for 3 years now. They sound just as good as the VTL ever did and once retubed nearly as good sounding as the Class A Zesto Eros 300. Which to my ear was the best sounding amp I ever owned, regardless I traded them. Unlike the Zesto the Prima Luna's not being a class A design does not get nearly as hot, nor have I ever had to send them into for repair once. I cannot say that about the MB-450's (Biggest mistake made reliability wise.) or Eros 300's. From my experience of actually owning PrimaLuna products, being American made does not mean squat as far as being able to run trouble free. If one does not care for how they sound, I cannot fault that. Not everything made can suit everyone's taste. I would advise anyone interested in owning a EVO 400 be sure to give it a listen first. 

pennfootball71 should take up audio review as a profession.

He'll go far.

walkertm

I'm very new to this forum and really don't post anything, mainly read and learn. But after reading your post I felt that maybe I should share my experience as it's a bit similar to your dilemma. I have been into 2 channel music for over 20 years, starting out with a pair of Polk Audio RT55I's and a Pioneer elite A/V receiver in 1999. Moving up the chain over the year's, my most recent amp was an Octave V70 class A Integrated matched with a pair of Sonus Faber Amati's. I've been extremely satisfied the past 2 years, and with a bit of tube rolling thought my system sounded perfect. Now, I have always had an itch for monoblocks...but always said to myself "really, how much better can it get". Finally the itch won and I had to scratch it, by purchasing a pair of ARC 160m's and the 6se preamp. Honestly, I was nervous as heck as I waited for them to arrive, knowing there's no turning back (as I bought them on the used market). I really loved the sweet sound of the Octave Class A, and was scared of losing it for just more powerful amps. I had no way of auditioning the ARC products so was going in blind, other than reading and researching as much as possible. To wrap this up, I received the 160m's and preamp, after spending the day running dedicated 20 amp outlets to each one, all I can say is WOW!!! They sounded so beautiful. I know the ARC gear is in a different league than my mid-level Octave, but I didn't expect such a jump in what I was hearing. So, no regrets here and my personal opinion, I'd go with ARC, I don't think you'll regret it either. 

My Primaluna EVO Power amp has benefited greatly from using Sophia Electric blue "coke bottle" EL34 ST  A-matched tubes in the power tube positions. Strangely, Sophia's 12AU7 tubes are not compatible with PL amps - a fact they mention on their site.. For that matter, most of my vintage 12AU7 tubes do not play well with PL amps or preamps in the driver tube positions. However, PL's branded 12AU7 tube sound pretty good.

The 12AU7 gain tubes on both the pre and power PL amps can be rolled. On the power amp gain tube positions I am using vintage Amperex 12au7 Bugle Boys to great effect.

I am also using Mullard metal base GZ34's in the rectifier tube positions on the EVO 400 pre. These vintage tubes are, of course, pricey but worth it.

@ bolong: Sorry I missed your question. I started with one EVO 400. I used at first the stock tubes and ran the unit in stereo. It was really impressive, especially in the mids and lower highs. Vocal were lush, full, and natural. Nonetheless, the bass slam was not there. I then moved to KT-88, I liked the sound of that too, the bass became tighter and faster. However, the top end did not have the bite I liked. I then moved onto the KT-150 which suited my tastes the best, Tight, fast, clean, with a top and bottom end that had authority, However, I could tell that the grip on the bass response was not as iron clad as it could be. I then saved up and purchased a second EVO 400 and retubed it with another set of KT-150s. That is when the late night to early morning listening sessions started. The change is subtle, but what you get when you run them in mono is better damping and current delivery, On the lowend the PL will make my Legacy Focus SE beg for mercy, These are a boomy speaker and you need an amp that is merciless in its abiltity to control those dual 12-inch woofers, Mids? I did not hear much of change. They are already outstanding in the stock stereo configuration, In upper mids and treble, I hear more sparkle and bite. Overall, running them in mono versus stereo, the EVO 400 become a more accurate versus a syrupy sounding amp. To my ear, the mono configuration brings out what is on the recording to a sharper focus. Has more detail, better delineation of the instruments, and the transients start and stop on a dime. The drawback for me is the top end gained more bite. That is due more to the KT-150 than running them in Mono. If i stuck with an EL34 from Gold Lion or Mullard that may not be the case.  Nonetheless, if you have a good local dealer. I suggest you ask if you can audition a second one at you home and see what you think. Given my tastes, I like the sound of the EVO in mono better than stereo. My speakers love the additional current delivery. That may not be the case for you, and I would hate for you to spend another $5300 on something that you feel did not do much to improve things, Wish you the best.