First and foremost, you must understand where the bottleneck is located before you can make any progress.
Hosts are quick to recommend new hardware but in many cases, unless it is clear you have hardware limitations, new hardware may not yield significant improvements.
Adding hardware has diminishing returns if not done smartly. Going from one server to two may double your resources but you then need to go from 2->4, 4->8 to get the same bump.
Monitor and Measure
If you are not monitoring system metrics, load times and other data, then that is the first place to start. Free tools like Munin and systat are great on server solutions. Tools like http://Browsermob.com and http://webpagetest.org can provide you with user-focused metrics.
Typically a straight port of a complex media site to another server is not very effective. Often you will get superior results for your investment by segmenting traffic.
For example, we have a client with a very busy flash game site (millions of hits/day). We have offloaded the flash games to a pool of inexpensive servers running Nginx. These systems push out TB's of traffic/month. These are entry level boxes and all they serve up is static content.
Now on the cost side, these two entry boxes combined were 20% cheaper than the primary server. We gained more than a 4x capacity improvement. If we had just cloned the primary server and load balanced, I suspect at best the improvement would have been 1.5-1.8x.
In short, putting some effort into understanding the guts of the performance issue can save you a lot of money later on.
DNS Made Easy
This is a DNS solution and does not really address load balancing. They may be talking about round-robin DNS. Not really sure why this was brought into the equation at this stage.
This is a tool to manage nodes in a LVS cluster. Once again not sure whey this specific item was suggested. Typically we just use a load balancer (hardware or something like Nginx/HA-Proxy) and route traffic to the appropriate backend servers.