2. amps-preamps
  3. 1339026952

ARC's new REF-75

I read Paul Bolin's review of the new REF-75 in AudioBeat and was really taken by it. So, this past weekend I drove down to Newport Beach and attended The S.H.O.W. to take a listen. In spite of the room being a bit bright, I could clearly hear the advantages this amp offers.

The REF-75 is physically beautiful with a kind of retro look. Must have been the meters. I love the looks of this amp! I placed my hand on top of the amp and it was barely warm to the touch. It runs really cool in spite of not having fans. Another advantage ... no fans ... no fan noise.

Right off the bat, the REF-75 was so grain-less, it was simply amazing. The sound comes out of a perfectly black background and the inner detail is amazing with great decay on vocals and simple instrumentals. I love classical guitar and small jazz groups, so this is right up my alley. Vocals were amazingly clear and realistic as well because of the lack of grain. Separation of instruments is another VERY strong point of the REF-75, adding realism to orchestral music. Tonality is one of the first things I listen for ... and this amp is right up there with the best of the ARC amps, including the big REF Monos. The demonstration was made using Wilson Shasha speakers ... 87db, and the meters hardly moved at all even while listening to full orchestral music. The darned thing just coasted no matter what was thrown at it. So, dynamics are terrific ... the amp supposedly uses the same power supply as that in the REF-110, so that would account for the dynamics and particularly good bass punch and depth. Huge sound stage as well. Width, depth and height were more than expected ... in fact, huge in every way.

The REF-75 I listened to at the SHOW was a prototype, but based upon what I heard, I'm buying one later this month. I've owned and/or listened to a lot of ARC amps over the years, and I can say without reservations, that this is one of the very best amps ARC has ever done. The release date is toward the end of June and the retail price is scheduled to be $9,000.00 US. Oh, and if you own a REF-110 ... sell it quick!

As a further note, I visited the Optimal Enchantment room and auditioned the new ARC REF-250 mono blocks. Randy Cooley, the owner of Optimal Enchantment, had the system set up in a suite and really had the system/room dialed in. Randy always has a great demo and has an impeccable taste in music. What I heard in Randy's room this year was simply magic. It had me shaking my head in disbelief wondering how much more information could still be hiding in those record grooves. Was it better than what I heard in the room that demoed the REF-75? Ahem ... it was, after all, Randy Cooley's room. :>)
128x128oregonpapa
johnsonwu
469 posts
 
@213cobra, based on this list of your current gear apprently you savor space, delicacy, and texture over pace and the somehat glassy openness that is characteristic of the current generation Audio Research gear (in their stock form) that draws the attention of audio buyers.
I have high regards of your opinion but what I found is those with deep pockets to buy new gear often seek out components with a sonic signature that leaps out at them.
HOwever, I must disagree with you classifying VTL and Focal into the mix of myth makers. IMO the current VTLs in pentode mode will leap out at you, not in triode mode. As for Focal, anything particular you dislike about them?
rtilden
156 posts
 
I will offer my opinions on the sound of that room at the show, just to give another perspective. I have no dog in this fight, and I will try to be as kind as I can, so as not to attract rotten eggs flinging in my direction. I did not stay long in this room, but I was seated in the 'sweet spot' listening to something jazz-like (can't remember exactly). What I heard was a rather dryish sound with boosted high registers and a moderately thumpy bass, in combination with a recessed midrange. And, it was quite a forward sound, all projecting from the front of the speakers, instead of mixing all around them. I won't go on, as I really don't want to piss off anyone. But this was not my cup of tea at all. It was playing rather loudly, which would cause all kinds of reflections and perhaps explain some of it. Only one or two others in the room with me. Sorry I don't have a better report. And I do hope that the room was to blame, but I do wonder....
djanggo
24 posts
 
"kent |kent|
past and past participle of ken .
ken |ken|
noun [in sing. ]
one's range of knowledge or sight : such determination is beyond my ken." ;)

Been down that road as well. Low powered/SET tubes Cary, Jadis, Kondo, and yes, a brief stint with Audion too (WE 300Bs on them being my favorite). Speakers among others then were Quad 57, 63, Tannoys, and AudioNote. What I'm trying to get to here is that there will always be trade offs. Never a system IME that will do all types of music as well and that would suit everyone at that. Condescending other brands whilst insisting your route is the only right route (well at least that exclusive 3% club) into attaining musical bliss is 'sorry' pure BS.

Don't own ARC Ref amps and have not heard the new REF75, but from frequent exposures at friends/dealers of their 150 and 250s, when everything is dialed in right, they could be highly musically rewarding and a noticeable steer away from past signatures of last decade or so when they did lots of hybrid stuffs, thus quite way off from your very negative descriptions of them.
213cobra
885 posts
 
>>but what I found is those with deep pockets to buy new gear often seek out components with a sonic signature that leaps out at them.<<

No doubt. But what does that kind of assertiveness of signature have to do with music? This has always been a tension in music reproduction, but there was once a balance. Now it seems in runaway. It would be easy to blame buyers who respond to the sound you describe, but it's builders who started down the path. I trace it to the sonically disastrous introduction of Krell circa 1980, which was a sharp turn in ego purchasing. At the time I was astonished that reviewers went along with the sound. It bent the industry, and of course only led loudspeaker designers to come up with more crossover-intensive designs, also having more difficult loads to drive. It's not hard to understand buyer preferences evolving toward the synthetic since the industry has been moving its market away from natural references for many years.

I agree VTL in triode mode, like most pentode or tetrode amps offering a pseudo-triode option, sounds different and largely better. Hardly anyone uses them that way, though.

My complaint about Focal is the obviousness of compression and tonal strain near the crossover points, and the insufficient unity behavior of the drivers -- not unique to Focal but it sounded especially distracting and not least because of being present in such an expensive speaker well engineered in so many non-sonic ways. I have to believe the designer(s) can do much better with so much material cost in their speakers.

Phil
213cobra
885 posts
 
>>What I'm trying to get to here is that there will always be trade offs. Never a system IME that will do all types of music as well...<<

I don't agree. Any combination of hifi gear claiming fidelity can and should perform any kind of music "well." Perhaps not perfectly, but certainly well. If it cannot play a full orchestra, Andrew Bird, Jack White, James Blake, Sierra Leone's Refugee All-Stars, Gillian Welch, Led Zeppelin, Doc Watson, M.Ward, the full international catalog of MA Recordings, Sonny Rollins, Gram Parsons, Justin Earl, Tom Waits, Hound Dog Taylor, Alison Krause, Kate Bush and Maria Callas with equal credibility, then a system is too skewed to genre.

I didn't reference my own systems, but you looked them up. Unless you've put together strong, big-glass SET with a fast & clean full range driver based speaker option of over 100db/w/m efficiency, you won't have heard the sound implied by what you saw listed. As speakers, Audio Note, Tannoy, Quad all impose marked trade-offs denting the polar graph of "all types of music [played] well." Good as they are, this can be overcome via some other brands.

You can get to a higher state of musical realism via many lesser-known brands *not* named Audio Research and some of the other offenders I mentioned. And I didn't mention "bliss." This is important to the point. Realism and convincing musicality are the objectives. If that's present, then you get bliss if the music content takes you there. If it doesn't, no bliss. Not all music is blissful. Were it so, that would be a distortion too.

Cary, Kondo, Jadis, Audion -- each a very different sound. I couldn't lump them together as representing any one thing. I haven't claimed there is one path; I've said that THIS path, represented by the ARC REF series and for reasons I've already written, is a dead end for anyone expecting more fidelity, not less, over time. That ARC has done worse in recent years doesn't convince me to be enthusiastic about the current series. I agree the new amps are better, still continuing a flawed direction. If you believe criticism is intrinsically condescending, then so be it but that's neither the tone nor intent of what I've written. Regardless, I stand by my description and people who don't agree will buy the REF amps or something like them.

Phil
More to discover