VAC Signature iQ200

I have really loved my 200IQ. I ended up going back to the stock tubes after trying a lot of different stuff. they sound best for my ear.

Looking forward to learning more about the 300. It would need to be a truly big jump for me to want to do a new purchase considering how much I do love my system now. I'm looking forward to reviews of the 300 when the time comes.

It's been a few years since I was active here. Good to see some of the same names! Cheers
 
I have been incognito myself…….I have been so happy with my Vac iq200, Vac Master pre, Magico S3Mk2 and the simethicone 80mg tablets that my gas symptoms had completely subsided. :P
 
Dguitarnut said:
I have been incognito myself…….I have been so happy with my Vac iq200, Vac Master pre, Magico S3Mk2 and the simethicone 80mg tablets that my gas symptoms had completely subsided. :P
Click to expand...

I absolutely love my MSB Ref, but I had a VAC Master before that and there are parts that I do miss. I'm not sure how much has changed in the last couple of years, but the VAC Master felt to me like the best bang for the buck at the time. It just made the music sparkle in the best ways.
 
Whilst waiting for final details of the VAC Master 300 amp, I'm experienced a renewed love for my pair of 200iQs. This is coupled with a recent motivation to slightly "simplify" the frills in my system, whereby I've started removing various tweaks. So as part of that, the stock GL KT88 & Tung-Sol 6SN7 tubes are back in my 200iQs, and they're resting on hockey pucks instead of the CMS platforms! (lol) The CMS platforms will be coming back eventually; I just got tired of moving them around for amp swaps.

I have to say - VAC instruments tend to be voiced very carefully from the factory with the STOCK tubes, and often I end up causing more harm than good trying to improve on these with tube rolls. I had Tung-Sol KT120 and Sylvania 6SN7GTA "tallboys" in there. I'm now admitting to myself the stock choices are better. I'd also tried to use some of the sweet older 6SN7GT / VT231 variants, but it's bloody difficult to get quiet, strong and balanced examples of these in quantities needed.

As I won't get back to my hifi until the weekend, I'm looking for any feedback & experience on the following:

  1. Balanced vs. SE input mode.
    Curiously, the specs list the SE inputs at a 3dB higher gain than balanced! I also use a VAC Master preamp, which will put out the same gain in SE or Balanced modes. So I can get 3dB extra gain by switching to from XLR to RCA interconnects (yes I know I have to flip the SE switches too) - that might be nice. Has anyone compared XLR vs. RCA on 200iQs? Is there any sonic consequence to this, good or bad? I'm using a shielded 1.5m run of cables, where the transmission advantages of XLR won't matter.
  2. Has anyone tried the Electro Harmonix KT88 or 6SN7 in these amps?
    They're from the same factory as Gold Lion / Tung-Sol "reissues" so it might not be a huge disruption to the VAC's voicing, whilst also giving a slightly different flavor that might work with certain genres...like I dunno, rock music? When I tried EH EL34 and EH 6SN7 ages ago, they seemed to be really good for rock. Not the most refined sounding tubes, but a fun listen. The Tung-Sol reissues sound similar to my memory of the EH 6SN7 tubes, but a bit warmer. I'd also be very interested in any experiences with Mullard KT88 reissues, or any other brand of KT88 for that matter (even Chinese).

Another avenue of "simplification" I've been kicking around: I may have over-silver'd my system cabling, and need to incorporate more copper again. Yikes. All of my interconnects and speaker cabling have been solid silver, for years now (at least I have copper AQ Hurricane PC cords everywhere). This weekend I went from a double-run biwire of 100% AQ silver (Kilimanjaro, top & bottom) back to a 50/50 silver & copper run (Kilimanjaro top, Mont Blanc bottom), and really liked it! The timbre seems much more natural this way. I think I want to keep looking in this direction. My "silver craze" traces back to the days when I ran Tannoy Canterbury SE with lower level components than now - my current GR series Canterbury are much more detailed, and with more top-end energy, whereas the SE needed the silver "boost".
 
Vac makes the best or of the best tubes amps
Every time I see vac the sound is amazing just real music playing
If I ever buy a tube amp for my big rig it’s got to be them for sure
 
Been doing more 6SN7 rolling experiments. I have lots of old 6SN7 now, and have been thoroughly testing them (MaxiPreamp II tester, then into a headphone amp's V1 slot for listening tests before 200iQ. Lots of old 6SN7GT have problems passing these 2 tests!!). The most surprising finding is that using all vintage tubes (both V1 and V2 slots for 8 total tubes in a pair of 200iQ) actually moves the SQ *backwards*. You really need to keep those stock Russian 6SN7GTB tubes in the V2 slots. I know the inclination is that old tubes are better sounding, and so a full set of NOS should be best. But those vintage tubes just aren't stiff enough to drive the big power tubes. You end up sacrificing dynamics and even image depth - and get a more diffuse, unengaging sound. Where the great vintage 1940s GT tubes shine is in the V1 slots. That's where they provide their magic tone, articulation and air, depending on which specific variant you use. WONDERFUL! Fortunately, it's also a LOT easier to find 4 of a vintage type than 8. I highly recommend this combination. With the right vintage V1 tubes, it's like a major component upgrade.
 
mulveling said:
Been doing more 6SN7 rolling experiments. I have lots of old 6SN7 now, and have been thoroughly testing them (MaxiPreamp II tester, then into a headphone amp's V1 slot for listening tests before 200iQ. Lots of old 6SN7GT have problems passing these 2 tests!!). The most surprising finding is that using all vintage tubes (both V1 and V2 slots for 8 total tubes in a pair of 200iQ) actually moves the SQ *backwards*. You really need to keep those stock Russian 6SN7GTB tubes in the V2 slots. I know the inclination is that old tubes are better sounding, and so a full set of NOS should be best. But those vintage tubes just aren't stiff enough to drive the big power tubes. You end up sacrificing dynamics and even image depth - and get a more diffuse, unengaging sound. Where the great vintage 1940s GT tubes shine is in the V1 slots. That's where they provide their magic tone, articulation and air, depending on which specific variant you use. WONDERFUL! Fortunately, it's also a LOT easier to find 4 of a vintage type than 8. I highly recommend this combination. With the right vintage V1 tubes, it's like a major component upgrade.
Click to expand...

Same experience with me. NOS 6SN7s just couldn't touch the stock ones.
 
rrwmd said:
Same experience with me. NOS 6SN7s just couldn't touch the stock ones.
Click to expand...

You guys should try NOS in just the V1 slots, if you still have any around. It can be wonderful! But yeah, NOS tubes in the V2 slots is a disaster here, and simply using the stock Russian GTB tubes in all slots is already so easy and so wonderful sounding. If running NOS in just V1 is a (+) to sound quality, running all NOS is a (--).

It really makes me think though, maybe Kevin could have used a different tube type with more drive, or a couple more 6SN7, for the V2 slots to drive the KT tubes? I'd played around with 6SN7GT in headphone amps years ago, and their sound starts falling apart like this (i.e. like I heard with NOS in the V2 slots) when you push them AT ALL. The 6SN7 likes to be coasting. I tested the crap out of my tubes yesterday, and noticed every Russian GTB measured at least 10% higher in transconductance than even my strongest NOS. It feels like the V2 slots really depend on that extra drive. Also it makes my think those V2 slots need to be kept with fresh tubes in them - don't wait until they've lost measurable strength to replace them.
 
Hi everyone,

I have a question about tube replacement.

In the mean time I own my pair of VAC 200 IQ’s for almost 4 years. I did not clock each hour of use nor the tube check does indicate that tubes need to be replaced (already). Nevertheless I am curious when do other (VAC) owners decide to replace the tubes of their amplifier(s) (and if so, only one or all tubes at the same time). Thanks in advance for your feedback and considerations.

Best regards, Jan
 
If it's been 4 years, then unless they've been sitting mostly unused, I'd try to get a full set NOW, but definitely also keep your old tubes as spares. The Russian tube supply is drying up AGAIN (almost same time as last year), so get them now if you can. The 6SN7 should generally last longer than KT88. It's fine to use vintage 6SN7GT in V1 slots, but be aware that V2 is much harder on them. I stick to GTA and GTB types in V2, and anyways I don't think you're going to beat the performance of Russian Tung-Sol GTB in V2.

I was running KT120 and replaced them after about 2 years (used regularly every weekend). I was being exceedingly conservative, but I did notice the 200iQs eat up the side getters faster than my Rogue Apollo monoblocks ever did.
 
mulveling said:
If it's been 4 years, then unless they've been sitting mostly unused, I'd try to get a full set NOW, but definitely also keep your old tubes as spares. The Russian tube supply is drying up AGAIN (almost same time as last year), so get them now if you can. The 6SN7 should generally last longer than KT88. It's fine to use vintage 6SN7GT in V1 slots, but be aware that V2 is much harder on them. I stick to GTA and GTB types in V2, and anyways I don't think you're going to beat the performance of Russian Tung-Sol GTB in V2.

I was running KT120 and replaced them after about 2 years (used regularly every weekend). I was being exceedingly conservative, but I did notice the 200iQs eat up the side getters faster than my Rogue Apollo monoblocks ever did.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your feedback. Good to hear that you prefer the same tube setting as I have. Agree, just to be on the safe side… order now :-). Will do!

Best regards, Jan
 
In the past I've been a big downer on the topic of a single 200iQ stereo, versus a pair in mono. I have to revise that opinion. Since the absolutely stunning Master 300's took over my main system duties, I've been playing the 200iQ's in a second system. This 2nd system is smaller and scaled down. Even allocating floor space for a pair of 200iQ feels overcrowded. And then, we have the Russian tube supply issue - I'd much rather rap on a quad of KT88/KT120 at a time, versus an octet!

So given that, I've been experimenting all over again with amps in this 2nd system (I've previously experimented with all these same amps in the main system):

* Rogue Apollo Dark (high power PP tube, 250 Watts/ch) - Best bass and dynamics. Good treble. Worst midrange - always a little dry and sterile, no matter what you do (tube rolling, triode mode, etc). In the past, this midrange didn't bother me as much as it does...now, I just can't get over it. Still a great rock & roll amp! Or for large-scale orchestral (not that I play it much) - the dynamics are stunning.

* Phison A2.120SE (Danish boutique, solid-state class AB 120 Watts/ch) - Good at everything. Very close 2nd in bass to Apollos. The Phison's bass is a little tighter and quicker; Apollo's bass a little fuller and more satisfying. Midrange done right for SS, here - it's even sweeter than the tubed Apollos! Can be a tad bright in some systems (Tannoy pepperpot tweeters can be rough), but not in this one (Tannoy tulip tweeter, even being much cheaper, is smoother).

* VAC 200iQ stereo - Better midrange by far, versus Phison and Apollos. Super sweet. Most holographic, 3D image. Most natural sound - full and satisfying, and with the most detail (except in bass). Bass is a bit soft and sluggish; starts to fall apart a little on hard rock.

* VAC 200iQ monos - Takes the stereo qualities and tightens everything up. Notes are fleshed out with a more weight and solidity; mono also renders cleaner tighter edges without harshness. Bass power and clarity / tightness is significantly improved. However, I STILL feel its bass loses out versus both the Phison and Apollos. I'm talking about hard rock at loud volumes, where the beat is hitting hard and fast. The 200iQ monos also seem to aggravate some room acoustic issues here in certain bass frequencies, whereas the other amps glide through this more easily. Now here's what's interesting - I find the 200iQ stereo might have a more "romantic" tilt to the midrange. Better clarity and detail on the monos for sure but...stereo configuration seems a little more rich, organic and satisfying somehow. You know what - I need to try stereo bi-amping!

* VAC 300 Master monos (only used in main rig) - Compile all the BEST attributes from the above amps, improve them further, and put them all together again. Add some "how did they do that" magic, for good measure. That only begins to express how amazing these amps are! Worth the price (you have to sit down for that part). Single biggest component impact I've ever heard in 20+ years. I haven't even tried a single 300 in stereo mode, yet. I might be in for a good surprise? My speakers are 8 ohms, and like with 200iQ's the 300's mono mode appears to be tap-optimized for 4 ohms (better match to 8 ohms in stereo?). I haven't picked on Kevin yet about the topic of taps for 8 ohm speakers, but I want to.

Anyways - I think a single 200iQ stereo amp might be looking like the winner in 2nd system! VAC sound, especially midrange, is very addictive.
 
mulveling said:
In the past I've been a big downer on the topic of a single 200iQ stereo, versus a pair in mono. I have to revise that opinion. Since the absolutely stunning Master 300's took over my main system duties, I've been playing the 200iQ's in a second system. This 2nd system is smaller and scaled down. Even allocating floor space for a pair of 200iQ feels overcrowded. And then, we have the Russian tube supply issue - I'd much rather rap on a quad of KT88/KT120 at a time, versus an octet!

So given that, I've been experimenting all over again with amps in this 2nd system (I've previously experimented with all these same amps in the main system):

* Rogue Apollo Dark (high power PP tube, 250 Watts/ch) - Best bass and dynamics. Good treble. Worst midrange - always a little dry and sterile, no matter what you do (tube rolling, triode mode, etc). In the past, this midrange didn't bother me as much as it does...now, I just can't get over it. Still a great rock & roll amp! Or for large-scale orchestral (not that I play it much) - the dynamics are stunning.

* Phison A2.120SE (Danish boutique, solid-state class AB 120 Watts/ch) - Good at everything. Very close 2nd in bass to Apollos. The Phison's bass is a little tighter and quicker; Apollo's bass a little fuller and more satisfying. Midrange done right for SS, here - it's even sweeter than the tubed Apollos! Can be a tad bright in some systems (Tannoy pepperpot tweeters can be rough), but not in this one (Tannoy tulip tweeter, even being much cheaper, is smoother).

* VAC 200iQ stereo - Better midrange by far, versus Phison and Apollos. Super sweet. Most holographic, 3D image. Most natural sound - full and satisfying, and with the most detail (except in bass). Bass is a bit soft and sluggish; starts to fall apart a little on hard rock.

* VAC 200iQ monos - Takes the stereo qualities and tightens everything up. Notes are fleshed out with a more weight and solidity; mono also renders cleaner tighter edges without harshness. Bass power and clarity / tightness is significantly improved. However, I STILL feel its bass loses out versus both the Phison and Apollos. I'm talking about hard rock at loud volumes, where the beat is hitting hard and fast. The 200iQ monos also seem to aggravate some room acoustic issues here in certain bass frequencies, whereas the other amps glide through this more easily. Now here's what's interesting - I find the 200iQ stereo might have a more "romantic" tilt to the midrange. Better clarity and detail on the monos for sure but...stereo configuration seems a little more rich, organic and satisfying somehow. You know what - I need to try stereo bi-amping!

* VAC 300 Master monos (only used in main rig) - Compile all the BEST attributes from the above amps, improve them further, and put them all together again. Add some "how did they do that" magic, for good measure. That only begins to express how amazing these amps are! Worth the price (you have to sit down for that part). Single biggest component impact I've ever heard in 20+ years. I haven't even tried a single 300 in stereo mode, yet. I might be in for a good surprise? My speakers are 8 ohms, and like with 200iQ's the 300's mono mode appears to be tap-optimized for 4 ohms (better match to 8 ohms in stereo?). I haven't picked on Kevin yet about the topic of taps for 8 ohm speakers, but I want to.
Click to expand...

I completely agree! They’re one of two of my favorite amps in the store. And clearly the Master 300’s are best looking! [emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
mulveling said:
In the past I've been a big downer on the topic of a single 200iQ stereo, versus a pair in mono. I have to revise that opinion. Since the absolutely stunning Master 300's took over my main system duties, I've been playing the 200iQ's in a second system. This 2nd system is smaller and scaled down. Even allocating floor space for a pair of 200iQ feels overcrowded. And then, we have the Russian tube supply issue - I'd much rather rap on a quad of KT88/KT120 at a time, versus an octet!

So given that, I've been experimenting all over again with amps in this 2nd system (I've previously experimented with all these same amps in the main system):

* Rogue Apollo Dark (high power PP tube, 250 Watts/ch) - Best bass and dynamics. Good treble. Worst midrange - always a little dry and sterile, no matter what you do (tube rolling, triode mode, etc). In the past, this midrange didn't bother me as much as it does...now, I just can't get over it. Still a great rock & roll amp! Or for large-scale orchestral (not that I play it much) - the dynamics are stunning.

* Phison A2.120SE (Danish boutique, solid-state class AB 120 Watts/ch) - Good at everything. Very close 2nd in bass to Apollos. The Phison's bass is a little tighter and quicker; Apollo's bass a little fuller and more satisfying. Midrange done right for SS, here - it's even sweeter than the tubed Apollos! Can be a tad bright in some systems (Tannoy pepperpot tweeters can be rough), but not in this one (Tannoy tulip tweeter, even being much cheaper, is smoother).

* VAC 200iQ stereo - Better midrange by far, versus Phison and Apollos. Super sweet. Most holographic, 3D image. Most natural sound - full and satisfying, and with the most detail (except in bass). Bass is a bit soft and sluggish; starts to fall apart a little on hard rock.

* VAC 200iQ monos - Takes the stereo qualities and tightens everything up. Notes are fleshed out with a more weight and solidity; mono also renders cleaner tighter edges without harshness. Bass power and clarity / tightness is significantly improved. However, I STILL feel its bass loses out versus both the Phison and Apollos. I'm talking about hard rock at loud volumes, where the beat is hitting hard and fast. The 200iQ monos also seem to aggravate some room acoustic issues here in certain bass frequencies, whereas the other amps glide through this more easily. Now here's what's interesting - I find the 200iQ stereo might have a more "romantic" tilt to the midrange. Better clarity and detail on the monos for sure but...stereo configuration seems a little more rich, organic and satisfying somehow. You know what - I need to try stereo bi-amping!

* VAC 300 Master monos (only used in main rig) - Compile all the BEST attributes from the above amps, improve them further, and put them all together again. Add some "how did they do that" magic, for good measure. That only begins to express how amazing these amps are! Worth the price (you have to sit down for that part). Single biggest component impact I've ever heard in 20+ years. I haven't even tried a single 300 in stereo mode, yet. I might be in for a good surprise? My speakers are 8 ohms, and like with 200iQ's the 300's mono mode appears to be tap-optimized for 4 ohms (better match to 8 ohms in stereo?). I haven't picked on Kevin yet about the topic of taps for 8 ohm speakers, but I want to.

Anyways - I think a single 200iQ stereo amp might be looking like the winner in 2nd system! VAC sound, especially midrange, is very addictive.
Click to expand...


Fantastic write up. Thanks for sharing!
 
Mike said:
I completely agree! They’re one of two of my favorite amps in the store. And clearly the Master 300’s are best looking! [emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

Yep, your production 300 Master design is really stunning in black! Have you by chance compared stereo versus mono mode yet? Or stereo bi-amped versus monos? I wonder if it's going to be similar to the 200iQ's story, just scaled up to the 300.
 
mulveling said:
Yep, your production 300 Master design is really stunning in black! Have you by chance compared stereo versus mono mode yet? Or stereo bi-amped versus monos? I wonder if it's going to be similar to the 200iQ's story, just scaled up to the 300.
Click to expand...

Yes, the monos will ruin you! They are sooooooo good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top