Amplifier considerations, PrmaLuna EVO 400 versus ARC Reference 160 S. Is ARC worth it?


Greetings all. I own a pair of PrimaLuna EVO 400’s paired with an a first generation ARC Ref 6 and Ref 3 Phono. This was done because I could not afford a pair of 160 M’s and wanted something to tie me over until I could afford them or another option came along. I have been taking a hard look at the Reference 160 S, However, the performance of the EVO 400 is so damn good. I am not sure I would gain anything. In fact, I would lose a lot of customizability and am not a fan of how the ARC amps are built with mounting the sockets for those big ass kT-150 onto the circuit board.

Here is an overview of how I set up the EVO 400’s. They are set up as Mono-bocks. and retubed with KT-150s. The preamp section are retubed with BLACK SABLE JJ ECC82 / 12AU7. A less colored and cleaner sounding tube over the stock Chinese made one. With this configuration I get a sonic signature that has a bit of bite on the top and tight controlled bass that is snappy and authoritative. Specifications change from 140 watts to 192 watts. The music I listen to is a lot of Classical, Gothic Metal, Rock, Jazz, Blues, Pop, and EDM. A lot of my favorite recording are bass heavy with heavy dynamics. Speaker used are 4 Ohm - 95 db efficient - with a frequency response of 18HZ-30KHZ.

The 160s I am considering is $24K has power rating of 140 watts. It is a cleaner sounding amp that does not have much voicing. Offering a more accurate presentation, with more inner detail. That may prove to have better sysnergy with the ARC gear I already own. Also, the case work and overall appearance of the product is top notch. Hence the interest in it.,

Contrasted to PL what I lose is... some musicality, the EVO 400 has more richness in the mids and vocals are more pronounced and have a greater sense of presence within the listening room. Again, the tube sockets are bolted onto the chassis. They do not use a cooling assist fan. I have the advantage of a Monoblock solution, that is easier to handle weight wise and offers better isolation of the signal between the two channels.

Where the PL Cheaps out, is the finish and the balanced inputs. I am not a fan of the battleship grey paint and hodgepodge just slapped together Chi-Fi look that the components have. Nor do I like the cheap ass balanced connectors they use. There is a big difference in quality between them and the ones on my Ref 6.

Any thoughts or opinions are welcome.

Many thanks for your time and trouble.

walkertm

In the end only you know what will make you happy.  From your post you have all the information you really need.

"just slapped together Chi-Fi look that the components have. Nor do I like the cheap ass balanced connectors they use. There is a big difference in quality between them and the ones on my Ref 6."

"Chi-Fi look?"  Sigh...

You are comparing a value/performance brand that's been positively reviewed over the years with a brand that targets a specific market.

Dopey post.

@ tablejockey If the blunt expression of my feeling on the PL fit and finish offends, my apologies. It is a given the PL product is more budget conscience. Sadly, your post does not offer much that is of use or has much thought behind it. Setting the PL build compromises and looks aside. It is still every bit a premium product performance wise. I think asking about a 24K upgrade is still worth exploring, to blindly waste money on something because it is considered more upscale? I consider dopey, especially if you already have the pleasant surprise of owning a product that gives the same level of performance for little over half the asking price. Spending more does not mean you get more. So, I see this as a fair question to ask.

Amplifier considerations, PrmaLuna EVO 400 versus ARC Reference 160 S. Is ARC worth it?

for me personally, absolutely, in my system, with my history

you don't say much about the rest of your setup... so no one can really tell you