Hi Lougiants,
Sorry, I should have been more clear. The only reason I was considering an upgrade was to do justice to my recently purchased new ARC Ref 110 with KT-120's. I was not unhappy with the LS17 or its performance. I compared the LS17SE to the Ref 3 and while the size of the soundstage is definitely more spacious with the Ref 3, I found the sound to be very similiar in tonal quality. The ARC tagline of being cut from the same cloth is certainly true in my opinion. For me, taking into account the cost and the smaller size of my listening room, the SE upgrade seemed to make the most sense for me. Would I have liked a Ref 3? No question, as I would like to have had the balance control and tube hour counter, etc. but I couldn't justify the difference in cost for an older, used Ref 3 vs an upgraded relatively new LS17.
Sorry, I should have been more clear. The only reason I was considering an upgrade was to do justice to my recently purchased new ARC Ref 110 with KT-120's. I was not unhappy with the LS17 or its performance. I compared the LS17SE to the Ref 3 and while the size of the soundstage is definitely more spacious with the Ref 3, I found the sound to be very similiar in tonal quality. The ARC tagline of being cut from the same cloth is certainly true in my opinion. For me, taking into account the cost and the smaller size of my listening room, the SE upgrade seemed to make the most sense for me. Would I have liked a Ref 3? No question, as I would like to have had the balance control and tube hour counter, etc. but I couldn't justify the difference in cost for an older, used Ref 3 vs an upgraded relatively new LS17.