who knows about BAT VK-50se's

How do you think these two preamps would compare, using the Krell FPB 600 as the power amp, and Eggleston Andras for speakers in a sizable room? I realize the CAT isn't balanced, so I guess that's possibly a strike against it, especially since the Krell works much better balanced.

But I'm already fully aware of the benefit of balanced operation, and I don't necessarily agree that it would help a digital component MORE SO than a phono component. There are balanced DACS that don't sum the differential output on the single ended side, and those really should NEVER be used with their RCA outputs (my CD player DOES SUM THEM, and I don't need a linestage with it anyway)...I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF ANYBODY HAD DONE A "SHOOTOUT" SPECIFICALLY WITH THESE TWO PREAMPS AND THE FPB 600, in particular. I think I'll be getting FPB monoblocks before I get a really good preamp anyway...And I'm not so sure tube pre's are the way to go, even though I do like them very much...ON THE CABLES SIDE...I do love MIT interconnects, but don't like their speaker cables. AND I DON'T LIKE TRANSPARENT AT ALL. I have auditioned some of their best in my system, and the affordable MIT has beat the hell out of Transparent Reference, and a TON of others too, like Cardas Neutral Reference!!! I think it's better to have somewhat short interconnect AND speaker cable runs, BECAUSE YOU CAN NEVER AVOID SIGNAL DEGRADATION WITH A LONG TRANSMISSION PATH (claims to the contrary are hype). There's more conductor in series; however "transparent" it might be, it has total effect on the signal's integrity. Just a fact of physics...even superconductors introduce more degradation with a longer run, so how can copper or silver sound identical, whether the run is long or short? The only reason Transparent can claim that theirs are "corrected for length" is that they use a series resistor...not exactly "transparent" after all. At least MIT cables have NOTHING AT ALL IN SERIES...