I just picked up a Phi 200 to try out for awhile. I've always wanted to own a Vac instrument. The reviews really are spectacular on his most recent gear, and Kevin Hayes seems like one of our hobbies good guys.
I have a pair of mono block Vac 140's and a 70/70 stereo amp. All are dressed in 4 pair of 300B's and 4 6sn7 driver tubes each. They sound wonderful when the tubes are right. Kevin does a great job building and designing his equipment.
The 300B sound reminds me of sitting in a local movie theater back in the 50's and 60's. The amps have a midrange to die for and hopefully next year I can have them upgraded and be finished with them.
I have an integrated phi beta 110. Bought it 5 years ago and am completely satisfied. First rate materials and sound. Have had the opportunity to meet Kevin Hayes. A true gentleman.
I have an integrated phi beta 110. Bought it 5 years ago and am completely satisfied. First rate materials and sound. Have had the opportunity to meet Kevin Hayes. A true gentleman.
I haven't heard the 450s with 9s, only 11s so the comparison I'll make are limited to a pair of 300.1s run as mono blocks with M1.2 and M2.2 Lamm Hybrids. The 300.1s have got a lot of headroom over the 1.2 Refs which despite doubling up down to 2 ohms. I feel that when the going get's tough, the 1.2s become midrange centric with the 9s where the 1.2s struggle with the VR-9's sealed mid-bass modules. At levels of about 90dB and below I think we've got a bit of yin vs yang. The 300.1s are beautifully lit up. I'm not too fond of the KT88 power tube because there's usually a sheen to the sound when not run in triode mode. The 300.1s are amps that have less of this sheen than any high powered tube amp based on the tube I've heard with VR-9s. The 1.2 Reference is darker in comparison with very clear tone but velvety texture. The M2.2 is tops on bass but doesn't have the liquidity of the 1.2 or the 300.1 monos. While better at control, it's still a shade darker but the velvety texture is diminished. For what I listen a lot to, rock, funk, r&b, neo-soul and tons of electronica, I still go with the 2.2s. With regards to classical music where the 2.2s are only really better on fortissimos, I'd give the nod to the 300.1s. Midrange wise all three amps are highly resolving and very neutral. By that I mean they aren't analytical, just recording and source component dependent. It's really a toss up and in all honesty I could very well live with any of them. As luck would have it I have both the M1.2 and the M2.2 so I run them bi-amped so I get the 1.2's pure Class A liquidity (magnified since they no longer have to deal with bass back emf) with the 2.2's bone rattling bass. Now I don't really know what 300.1s cost. My brother tends to get a bad case of amnesia after he signs the checks
In the end it is no surprise that VRs sound excellent with VAC gear. Kevin and Albert go back a long way and Albert's personal reference for tube electronics has been VAC for at least the past 8 years or so. I'd pit a pair VR-5 Anniversaries with a stereo pair of 300.1s or even a Phi Beta (if one could actually find one) against pretty much anything out there.
I haven't heard the 450s with 9s, only 11s so the comparison I'll make are limited to a pair of 300.1s run as mono blocks with M1.2 and M2.2 Lamm Hybrids. The 300.1s have got a lot of headroom over the 1.2 Refs which despite doubling up down to 2 ohms. I feel that when the going get's tough, the 1.2s become midrange centric with the 9s where the 1.2s struggle with the VR-9's sealed mid-bass modules. At levels of about 90dB and below I think we've got a bit of yin vs yang. The 300.1s are beautifully lit up. I'm not too fond of the KT88 power tube because there's usually a sheen to the sound when not run in triode mode. The 300.1s are amps that have less of this sheen than any high powered tube amp based on the tube I've heard with VR-9s. The 1.2 Reference is darker in comparison with very clear tone but velvety texture. The M2.2 is tops on bass but doesn't have the liquidity of the 1.2 or the 300.1 monos. While better at control, it's still a shade darker but the velvety texture is diminished. For what I listen a lot to, rock, funk, r&b, neo-soul and tons of electronica, I still go with the 2.2s. With regards to classical music where the 2.2s are only really better on fortissimos, I'd give the nod to the 300.1s. Midrange wise all three amps are highly resolving and very neutral. By that I mean they aren't analytical, just recording and source component dependent. It's really a toss up and in all honesty I could very well live with any of them. As luck would have it I have both the M1.2 and the M2.2 so I run them bi-amped so I get the 1.2's pure Class A liquidity (magnified since they no longer have to deal with bass back emf) with the 2.2's bone rattling bass. Now I don't really know what 300.1s cost. My brother tends to get a bad case of amnesia after he signs the checks
In the end it is no surprise that VRs sound excellent with VAC gear. Kevin and Albert go back a long way and Albert's personal reference for tube electronics has been VAC for at least the past 8 years or so. I'd pit a pair VR-5 Anniversaries with a stereo pair of 300.1s or even a Phi Beta (if one could actually find one) against pretty much anything out there.
And I remember one show many years ago when Albert was showing a new speaker line driven by Counterpoint OTLs. (I think the speaker was designed for Counterpoint???)