Need to learn about Audio Research

I've used an ARC LS 2B mkII hybrid tube pre and a D 200 SS amp in my main system for years.  Never owned any Maggies, but many other speakers have been powered by this pair, mostly dynamic drivers systems and for a while a set of Martin Logan electrostats.  Never had any issues (knock on wood...) and have loved the sound.  The LS 2B mkII is a gem, and does have a (rudimentary) remote (volume up / down and mute).  My "audiofool" :-) buddies consistently praise the this systems sound, and regularly comment on it's value.  I'd suggest this gear is worth investigating via the used market.  Happy listening! 

I've used an ARC LS 2B mkII hybrid tube pre and a D 200 SS amp in my main system for years.  Never owned any Maggies, but many other speakers have been powered by this pair, mostly dynamic drivers systems and for a while a set of Martin Logan electrostats.  Never had any issues (knock on wood...) and have loved the sound.  The LS 2B mkII is a gem, and does have a (rudimentary) remote (volume up / down and mute).  My "audiofool" :-) buddies consistently praise the this systems sound, and regularly comment on it's value.  I'd suggest this gear is worth investigating via the used market.  Happy listening! 

ARC tube amps have a definite warm “Tube house sound. And while I don’t currently have anything, I can assure you they make great products.  Having said that, the sound isn’t for everyone and or every speaker.  
Also, depending on your listening levels and whether you use sub’s, 100 watts might not be enough power for the 3.7i’s. (They really like current) but If you use an active crossover and roll the Maggie’s off @65 htz,, 100 watts is way more power than you need. There are a bunch of other variables you will need to consider also. Room size and and acoustics to name a couple.

Have you ever considered getting a hybrid amplifier?  Tubes on the input section and Mosfets for the output stage?

All the best.

Apropos @richardbrand ’s post upthread, I got to meet Peter Walker at McCormick Place in Chicago during the 1976 CES. I had a pair of Quads which I bought in 1974 and they are still in use today! (Sympathetically restored by Kent McCollum in 2017). I run them with an old pair of Quad IIs that were redone by the late Bill Thalmann with first rate glass.

Walker was notable for a couple of famous quotes, including the type of wire necessary for his equipment. It went something like this (I’m paraphrasing): First, it must be long enough to connect from the amplifier to the speaker, and secondly, it must be conductive.

Another brilliant guy in a quirky, fascinating industry filled with colorful characters.

~

 

I have the 3.7i and pair it with a Pass 250.8 the sound is magnificent. I purchased the Pass after reading it had won the best of show when paired with the Maggie’s.

plenty of power and no hassle with tubes.

good luck and good listening.

@whart 

Not to mention his "we don't actually listen to our amplifiers, we let our customers do that".

He described his amplifiers in engineering terms "unconditionally stable into any load".

I am a bit surprised that nobody has done a digital version of the Quad ESL-63 but then very few seem to understand the principle behind the eight concentric rings with their time delays ...

@traudio you have some great equipment.  The Hegel is a great integrated.  I agree that it is likely silly to put a tube pre in front of it but if you are already planning on going the separates route, you might by the pre first, try it, might surprise you.  Hegel makes great amps and the amp in your integrated can drive most speakers without issue.  Now, preference on the sound signature difference between the amps is a different animal, for sure you might prefer the sound signature / pairing with your Maggie’s if you swap amps / pre’s.  I have compared Tube amps / pre’s to SS.  I’ve landed on liking a tube pre with SS.  As others have mentioned, can give you the best of both worlds.  Pass, Krell, Coda would all be great pairings with your Maggie’s, known to drive difficult speakers loads across a wide range, handle dips into the 2 ohm range.  A couple of less expensive options would be Parasound and Music Fidelity, both design SS amps that are great at driving difficult loads and punch well above their weight class.  A Parasound A21 was my fist serous 2 channel price of equipment, added into my HT set up, starting me down the 2 channel rabbit hole, great amp.  Adding Subs would be my first move, before changing up your pre / amp.  Those would be a game changer.  Might find that with the subs, you love the Hegel handling the mids and highs.  Good Luck!  

mm1tt77
I have a pair of SVS SB3000 subs. 
Guess I need to update my gear list 

ARC has revealed 6 new modestly priced components. Hopefully they will go back to a cleaner more industrial look and will ditch the ubiquitous meters!

I have an ARC REF 6 paired with a Pass 250.8 that drive Wilson Sabrina X's.  I am very happy with the sound of the combo.  I get the great tube sound of the ARC and the smooth power of the Pass. I have about 4000 hrs on the ARC, no problems with it at all.  Of course, everything in a system matters, so who knows?  Your room acoustics, cabling or DAC may change things up significantly.

I have an Infinity FET preamp that I’m going to put up for sale. Back in the day, The Absolute Sound claimed it was one of the three best preamps in the world alongside the Audio Research SP-1 and the Mark Levenson.

Anyone have an idea of what it’s worth? It’s serial number 329, one of the last made. I’m the original owner and bought it directly from Infinity.

@rubiconmike

Check on hifishark search the unit, click on sold/expired and that will tell you the prices others have listed it for.

The fellow from this ad likes to look at his Jeff Rowland gear so much he had to have it in the background in every picture

https://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649765369-extremely-rare-infinity-fet-preamp/

@mclinnguy 

Thanks! Looks like mine is in better shape than the one in that ad, and I have the original box too.

I really enjoyed this dialogue. I too (soon), will be looking out for a tube pre-amp.

It's all good information. THANKS.

IAN.

I have rebuilt Maggie 3.3rs and have used lots of different amps on them, including Rogue Magnum 120s - pretty powerful tube amps. Maggies really like to slurp good quality high power. Ultimately they are at their best actively biamped with 200-250 wpc  (8 ohms) amps that double into 4 ohms.  

But you can't easily biamp the 3.7i, so I would look to an amp at least 200/250 wpc into 8 ohms that doubles wattage into 4.  Parasound A21 is pretty beastly and does that.  I would also consider supplementing with multiple subwoofers set very low in gain. 

I've gotten good results in driving all my speakers, including Maggies with an ARC Ref 5se preamp driving a Hegel H590 amp, or a Class D Audio 470C amp.  The ARC preamp adds some tube sound (air, soundstage, detail resolution, etc.) - which sounds great with a range of speakers, which seems a bit better than all solid state gear (just the H590 integrated, Parasound, etc.).  Either of those amps with the ARC preamp sound superb with Maggies and Harbeths.  And the Class D Audio amp is superb for about $700 new.  He now offers great GAN amps - still a great price for great sound.  I really like the benefits of the remote control features of the ARC preamp.  And... I've had no problems with the ARC service - had to return a ARC Ref 150se amp for a minor repair of one of the speaker terminals about a year ago.  They provided great, timely service with no issues.    

You will only benefit from an upgrade, no matter which brand or type of amp or preamp, with careful matching. Which means you know your system well and can realistically predict how an upgrade is likely to sound in your system. Then you can buy the new (to you) item(s) with relative confidence. But, often, this is not possible, especially when making the magnitude of change you are contemplating in combination with not having experience with ARC. Hence the value of a trusted dealer. So an audition is needed. 
 

Recent ARC gear is very reliable and biasing is a breeze. A Ref 250 set is likely to sound fantastic and will have sufficient power. But, again, it will require an in-person audition or “audition through purchase.” 
 

My Ref75 SE is my forever amp. But I’m running a Linn Klimax DSM/3 direct in and I’m driving Thiel speakers so my experience does not help you. But I can tell you that the current gear is well-designed and very reliable. 

They have some beautiful equipment....

Most of the advice here is pretty good, except for going to solid state.  Tube equipment always sounds better to equivelent solid state, even today.  Here is an article that talks about why w/o all the drama.  https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-cool-sound-of-tubes    This is from IEEE, and it discusses this topic rationally, not with all the arguments and emotions.

Also my wife, who is a fabuluus singer, has perfect pitch, and could care less about equipment except for the final output, has never rated SS above tube all other things held equal.  You don't know how wonderful it is to have this type of person living with with regards to stereo setup and equipment selection.

Someday SS may be equivalent or better than tube, but I haven't heard it yet.

Now on observations on durability.  Unless you are running your tube equipment using high current setups like Jadis, I've found that tube equipment requires less repairs than solid state.  I still have my dad's equipment originally bought in 1961, and most of the tubes are original.  Now, I have had all the caps replaced and the switches and dials cleaned and rebuilt, but that was in 2006.  Every piece of solid state equipment I have owned has had more issues along the way, and I've had a lot of transistor issues after the equipment gets from 10 years (normal consumer grade) to 30 years (better equipment like what you're looking at).  It is a bit of a myth that tube stereo equipment is less durable than solid state.  I think that that concept came from the days of tube TV's.  CRT's required a lot of current, so tube TV tended to be a pain in the butt and burn out tubes.

I've never actually owned Audio Research, but I have friends who have.  It sounds quite good.  It is dependable and very well made.  The biggest problem I've heard from them is parts availability.  Unless that has changed with the current owner, you ended up having to go to them for repairs.  They wouldn't sell parts to third parties.  I was hoping when McIndosh owned them that that would be corrected.  Just don't know the current state.  I tend to keep equipment for a long time, and only upgrade when I hear a significant improvement or something breaks and cannot be repaired.

I also get a kick of people citing "recording professionals and musicians" for their blind tests.  How were they set up?  Who were the recording professionals and musicians?  What is their recording pedigree?  Do they even care about stereo equipment?  What are the parameters?  When I was a sceintist, I ran acrass many peer reviewed, double blind studies that were worthless.  They had poor controls that were set up to bias the wanted outcome.

Not all recording professionals are good at making recordings.  When I was in undergrad, I made better recordings using lesser equipment than the outside professional they hired.  He always messed up microphone placement in his intellectual quest to record the "true sound".  I saw that many times when I was a more active musician.

I've known a lot of professional musicians: classical, Motown, jazz.  I played duets in high school with this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Baer   Many of them, thie first being my contrabass teacher's wife in high school, really have no concept of a good sounding stereo.  She used to use a portable record player (mono) with many records stacked on its automatic changer.  This piece of equipment ws the worst of the worst.  That was her rehearsing studio.  Ten feet from her was a much better stereo.  A surprising number of pros just don't care about stereo equipment, and would be poor judges of equipment.  

At least in classical, I think I understand it.  When you are playing in an orchestra, the sound is very diffrent on stage performing than it is when you are in the audience.  In the example above, the mono player may have represented better what she heard when performing than what we listeners want, which is the sound from a good performance in a good hall.

I've owned a PH-3 and PH-7 phono preamps. Both excellent for their time. I grew out of the PH-3 and looked in the used market for an upgrade and found a PH-7 in Canada. I didn't think there was anything new or used in its price range that was as good. I've also owned a number of ARC preamps, including LS 22, Reference 2 Mk. II, and Reference 3. I would have kept the Ref. 3 for the rest of my life but it blew tubes frequently. It probably needed biasing. Changing preamp tubes is difficult because I had to pull out all the interconnects attached to it and then replace them. I replaced the Ref. 3 with a top-of-the-line Pass XP-30. Three boxes, one for power and the others for each channel. The Pass is pretty equivalent to the ARC Ref. 3. For the most part (they have made lemonds, like the LS 22), I love ARC gear.

If class D is a consideration reach out to Alberto Guerra at AGD and Ralph at Atma Sphere.  Both very good to work with and more than willing to share their experience and knowledge. I moved away from tubes to AGD Audion with Cary SLP 05 pre.  Driving Joseph Audio Perspectives.  ( not nearly the load) Anyway never thought I’d move to class D but could not be happier.  Just sharing my experience moving from all tube to class d w/ tube pre.  I think most of the “preferred” Class d manufacture's offer demo options.  I might start with AGD & Atma Sphere.