Rogue vs ARC

Any legitimacy to the statement that the Rogue is made cheaply? Not a question of sound here, but parts, fit, trim etc. Even if so does not mean they do not sound as good as ARC, but is it really a lower level of construction (something worth paying extra for, for some folks.)

Don_c55, no doubt ARC is a much more established company and long-lasting for good reason - it is unquestionably one of the great companies, with some of thebest products in the history of hifi, but that doesn't speak to your claims that the Rogue product does not compare, as a piece of equipment, to ARC gear. I guess the reaction is the sense you were denigrating a small company that has been growing and getting better year by year, some people seem to really like their equipment. It seems like the have been moving more upscale over the past few years.

Don, I feel very much at peace. And true, it is a forum for opinion. But you stated that the Rogue is cheaply built, question is if that is true? It's important because statements like that can affect a companies reputation, and it ends up getting repeated. I have no idea if Rogue is cheaply built or not (it may be), I do know their gear sounds pretty darn good at the shows, and their latest stuff looks exceptionally well built in terms of casing. etc. I certainly would be the last to argue that ARC is not top flight in terms of build, service, and for some sound.

I imagine Rogue would acknowledge as much on the parts side to the extent that they offer the Magnum upgrades to most if not all their products, but value on their standard offerings would seem to me their driving mission. I can't imagine anyone would ever argue that ARC is not one of the finest manaufacturers in the audio business (and has been for a very long time - an American Luxman?), aside from issues of sound, they make execeptional quality products and provide first-rate support (Rogue may too, but I've never owned their gear...)

I would say not needing repair is better than getting repairs, with needing them and not getting them being the worst.

Tvad, I agree. I think circuits are much more important than parts in many, many cases. At least, they are more fundamental to the sound of a piece.

I think Nelson Pass might agree as well. Roger Modjeski too. Now, when marquis pricing is connected to those "high-end" passive parts with the promise of taking you yet one step closer to the absolute sound (without actually getting you there) it makes sense to sell with "Intel Inside". I'm no totally cynical on this, but I would take a great design over a box full of audio jewelry by a lesser designer any day of the week. So, I do agree, looking at parts is no way to tell if a design is good (to the ears).

But Tvad, what would Audiogon be without sweeping generalizations and unwavering opinions and conclusions? All kidding aside, I think the need to discuss all amps in the context of the speakers being used is essential to relevance of any assessment regarding said amp.