Mark Levinson 32 or Audio Research Reference 3


My next upgrade will be a preamp and I want a Reference. After doing some research I have narrowed it down to these two. Can somebody who had both shed some light in how they compare in sound? I have Levinson gear at home so I am excited about the 32 however I can't ignore the possibility that I might be losing out if I don't go with the Audio Research Ref 3. Need help, Thanks

My System:
Mark Levinson 23.5
Mark Levinson 27.5
Proceed AVP2
Dynaudio Confidence 5
Dynaudio 1.3SE
Meridian 508.24
DH Lab Air Matrix Cable
Monster M1 Cable
trance

Showing 2 responses by raquel

I would be extremely reluctant to purchase an expensive used Madrigal product unless you have a solid preexisting relationship with them - there have been a lot of nightmare stories reported on this and other forums over the years about Harmon's service involving used Madrigal gear (it seems the problems started when the Madrigal facility in Connecticut was closed six or seven years ago).

That said, I tend to prefer top-shelf solid-state preamps over tubed ones because they layer space as well as the best tube pre's, but are quieter, the noise floor in amplification components being of paramount importance in the very high-resolution systems these pieces tend to be used in. While I understand that the Ref 3 is very quiet for a tubed unit, the 32 regenerates power and is dead quiet, something you will clearly hear and come to appreciate quickly.

I also run my non-tube amp components 24/7 and do not know whether the 6550 in the Ref 3's power supply would hold up in 24/7 use (very possibly, but I would need to know), and if it doesn't, whether it is absolutely safe at the time of failure, whether failure of that tube takes out a resistor requiring soldering, etc. I have no fear about the small signal tubes in that preamp, but output tubes are another matter and can arc and engage in other scary pyrotechnics when they die. Does anyone know what kind of voltage the 6550 sees in the Ref 3's power supply?

Finally, the vast majority of tube preamps (ones not using output transformers, which is 99% of them) have difficulty driving long interconnects to the power amp without causing bass rolloff, so if your power amp is more than, say, 3 meters away from your preamp, this could be an issue. Tube preamps also have much higher output impedances than solid-state preamps, causing mismatches with certain amplifiers that again result in bass rolloff. The ARC Ref 3 claims an output impedance of 600 Ohms, but as is usually the case, no frequency range is given with this spec - 600 Ohms is almost surely the nominal rating and it will be significantly higher at low frequencies. If the input impedance on your amp is above 50 kOhms, or if your amp is just a few meters from the preamp, then you're probably okay.

Here is one of many threads that addresses Harmon's service:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?aamps&1281863487&read&keyw&zzmadrigal+used+service
I stand corrected about the issue regarding tube preamps driving long interconnects.

To be more specific about potential impedance mismatches between preamps and power amps, the general rule of thumb is that the input impedance of the amp must be at least ten times the worst output impedance of the preamp. A problem is that tube preamp manufacturers don't usually tell the whole truth about preamp output impedances. If they simply provide a number without stating the frequency response at which that impedance was measured, assume the impedance is much higher in the low bass frequencies - a stated number of "400 ohms" probably refers to the impedance when measured at 1 kHz., while there's an excellent chance that it's 4,000 ohms in the deep bass. Taking, then, an output impedance figure of 4,000 ohms, the input impedance of your amp would have to be at least 40,000 ohms (i.e., at least ten times the worst output impedance of the preamp) in order to avoid matching issues. Tube amps typically have input impedances of 100,000 ohms, so they usually don't pose a problem. Solid-state amps, however, can be 600 ohms or lower (examples include vintage Rowland and many studio amps). If you are running a Goldmund preamp with a 10 or 20 ohm output impedance (or Rowland or darTZeel preamp with 50 ohm output impedance), you won't have to worry about mismatches. If you are running a tube preamp, however, you can face an issue, particularly if your amp is solid-state.

Ralph (Atmasphere) asks a good question - why is your choice limited to Audio Research and Levinson? Do you live outside of the U.S. or Asia, where other high-end brands are frequently not distributed? Both the Levinson and the Audio Research are fully differential balanced - do you want an ARC Ref 3 or Levinson 32 because your Levinson amps are balanced? Used balanced tube preamps available for approximately the same price as a Ref 3, and that have equal or better performance than the Ref 3, include the BAT 52 and the Atmasphere reference preamp (the Einstein comes to mind, too, but it will be more expensive and there are very few on the used market). Many people also prefer the earlier Audio Research reference preamps, as it is much easier to try different brands of tubes (the Ref 3 uses the 6H30 tube, for which there are only a couple of brands).

If you are willing to consider balanced solid-state preamps other than a Levinson 32, and with sound and build quality that is as good or better, I would consider the Rowland Coherence II (it uses a battery power supply, like the darTZeel and ASR) or the best Pass preamp from a few years ago. I have a Coherence II.

If you do not require a fully differential balanced preamp, then there are at least a dozen single-ended tube preamps available used that are as good or better than the Ref 3. As for single-ended solid-state preamps, there are very few truly great ones. If you can live without a remote control and if you don't mind dual volume controls, the Lamm L2 is superb (it uses a tube in the power supply, but the circuit is fully solid-state). Naim's reference preamp is also superb, but like the Einstein tube preamp, there are very few available used.

Trance: I just saw your last post. Be very careful of equipment reviews, as many are unreliable, including reviews in the well known magazines. Equipment reviewers do not perform controlled blind reviews in laboratories - their reviews are subjective and depend upon the other components in their systems, the type of listening room that they have, the quality of the A/C power supplying their systems, the type of music that they listen to, whether they judge equipment on the basis of vinyl or digital, whether they still have good hearing, etc. Also remember that audio reviewers often review equipment that has been "loaned" to them by the manufacturer or distributor on a "long-term basis", and review a lot of equipment of manufacturers that advertise in their magazines. I'm not saying that all reviews are bullshit, but in addition to reading reviews, you need to get to know people who work on high-end equipment for a living, get to know musicians who also happen to be audiophiles, get to know manufacturers, dealers and distributors, get to know audiophiles who have very carefully assembled systems installed in good rooms who listen to recordings of unamplified acoustic instruments, etc. Finally, be very careful of what you read on Audiogon - like the idiot who was talking about bass loss in the event of long interconnects driven by tube preamps, many, if not most, of the people posting here do not know what they are talking about - asking a question in an uncontrolled Internet forum is like screaming out a question in a mall parking lot.

Good luck.