Need help with tube linestage-SF vs ARC vs Others


I am considering purchase of a tubed linestage to add a little body/bloom to the midrange of my all SS rig for popular, blues and rock (not metal). System is Muse 10/Muse 3 Sig/McCormack DNA500/Alon Circe. I don't want to totally give up bass definition/extension or HF extension, would strongly prefer balanced, and would like SS pass through for HT. Unfortunately the Aesthetix Calypso is currently above my budget (around $2000). Other continders are:

SF Line 3 - could always add SE upgrade later, but in stock form is it too dry/sterile, and not much different from my SS pre?

ARC LS16 MkII - How good is this unit?

ARC LS5 MkII or III - supposedly quite good, but I don't believe it has a remote or HT pass through, does it?

Line 2 SE - How good is this?

CJ 17LS or 14LS - not balanced, and possibly not very extended at the extremes.

Any others??? Thanks for the help.
mitch2

Showing 3 responses by mitch2

Thanks everyone so far,

Mthieme, how good is the Vk-30? I used to own a Vk-500, and it sounded pretty good, but sort of broke up a bit when asked to rock on complex pieces. The DNA 500 was a definite improvement. Could you elaborate on the strengths/weaknesses of the Vk-30?

Magnepanmike, I understand what you are saying about the 6922 having more bloom, but I am not looking for at 360 degree swing, just a little more bloom to the mids without sacrificing the extremes, so maybe the LS16 Mk III would do that for me, or is it totally sterile like a SS preamp? Also, can you tell me if there are any other significant weaknesses to that piece, like tube glare or harshness in the HF?

Kira, is the Modwright 9.0SE a tube preamp or SS, and does Dan have a website with information posted on this?
Thanks Semi, your comments are very helpful. In your opinion, how much does the LS16 give up to the LS25 and the non-SE version Line 3, and in what areas. I am narrowing down to LS16MkII or Line 3, probably to be upgraded later. Thanks
Bigkidz, I had sort of a similar issue with my Vk-500 amp, while the bass was great, and it sounded quite good at lower to moderate levels, when the going got rough...like during complex passages at moderate to higher volume...well, dynamics (especially the midrange) seemed a bit constrained. Since the power supply was more than adequate, I always suspected the mosfet output, but I am really not qualified to even speculate on something like that. Have not had a similar issue with my DNA-500. Anyway, that is one reason I did not look harder at the BAT models, along with the suspected HF rolloff some previous BAT owners have mentioned. I did go ahead and purchase a SF Line 2SE. I thought hard about the Line 3, but didn't want to have to worry about 12 tubes, and would not have been able to swing the SE upgrade right away. KR didn't seem to find too much difference between Line 2&3, except maybe the bass and a little in the HF. I am hoping the better parts in the SE version will help with any HF issues, and will allow more bloom in the mids. I would welcome any suggestions for best tubes to use with this unit, and where to get them. Thanks again to all who responded, you provided good suggestions, but I had to start somewhere. Also, the 270 ohm output of the Line 2 is lower than many tube units, and should be low enough to mate well with the (sort of low) 10k ohm input of the DNA-500 (at least it is greater than the 10:1 rule of thumb).