Audio Research Ref 3 Opinions

Guido:

Yesterday, the tube hours counter read in the 130s; my rig is off right now.

I did the a/b comparisons using the stock cords on both units.

The Ref 3 comes with a hefty cord with a 20 amp IEC. I plan to eventually try out some commercial cords (probably Shunyata, others), as well as homemades made from twisted solid core wire shielded with tin foil. The sound is good enough that I have not felt compelled to mess with it yet.

I think you are really going to like the Ref 3. To my ears it does not cast a soundstage via the phasey sound you mentioned at all; it is gone. Rather, the sound is extremely focused, clean, and transparent. The soundstage you get is more like what is on the recording, but not necessarily as "spread out" as on the Ref 2 (at least not at this stage of break-in). The Ref 3 is really quite different sounding than the 2 but is still "beautiful" and natural, as opposed to cold and mechanical.

To perhaps help you put my comments in context, my current system is:

Sony XA-777es
ARC Ref 3
ARC VT-100 mk iii
Vandy 5A
Audioquest Anaconda ICs

I'm sure I'll get around to messing with my digital front end eventually. I wish that we would see some more killer SACD players, as I have invested a fair amount in SACD software and generally like what I hear.

Best regards.

ROM

Has anyone tried the REF3 with EMM LABS DCC2?

Thank you so much Rom, the Ref 3 sounds more and more attractive. One of the probs I heard with the Ref 2 Mk. 2 was a trace of an almost glassy sheen on the instruments, almost a touch of glare. Is that gone as well?

Guido:

I did not find sheen or glare to be a problem with the 2. I do not really recall a difference in the two preamps in this regard. Again, there is a family resemblance to the sound between the 2 and 3, so this is something you will need to check out for yourself.

I would be interested to hear the opinions of others who have tried the 3 with top flight sacd front ends.

Rom, I detected the slight 'sheen' when auditioning the Ref 2Mk. 2 next to a Boulder 1012 preamp, which seemed at the time to have a slightly warmer more musical sound, still maintaining top/bottom extension. The preamps were driving a Rowland 3.02, and a pair of Utopia (perhaps Altos). By comparison the Ref 2 Mk. 2 sounded just slightly hard. In complete honesty though, I auditioned the Ref 2 Mk. 2 another time on a different system, driving ARC VT200 and Maggie 3.6 speakers, and found it marvellous.
In both cases, the Ref 2 was driven by an ARC CD-3 Mk. 3.