Warning, this is a rather long post!
What you will find below is something in between a bunch of coarse listening notes and an audition report. I am just cleaning my notes and adding a few observations after
my listening session today, which lasted almost 3 hours. The system configuration is listed below. Please note that instead of the VAC Ren II, I listened to the VAC Ren SIG
II, as neither Phi 2.0 nor Ren II were available. Furthermore, my starting listening position was less than perfect; the ports on the rear of the speakers were initially partially hidden by some other
speakers in the rather busy room; the ARC Ref 3 was first not running balanced, although it was using balanced ICs. These initial problems were
corrected progressively during the first 45 minutes of listening.
Please note that neither the complement of PCs, ICs, speaker wires and speakers would have been my first choice. Furthermore, a slight case of tinnitus my be coloring somewhat my findings.
1. DCS P8I single box CD/SACD player.
2. Accuphase DP-77 single box player.
3. Kimber KG4 power chord on DCS and DP-77.
4. Cardas Golden 5C balanced
IC to preamplifier.
5. VAC Renaissance Signature 2.
6. Initially Cardas Hex Link power chord on VAC, then switched to Synergistic Research Designer ref 2 Master coupler with active biasing inactive.
7. Audio research Ref 3 linestage original version; original 6H30 type tubes; no inline update.
8. Stock power chord on Ref 3: other 20 Amp chord not available.
9. cardas cross balanced ICs to amp.
10. Jeff Rowland 302 stereo amp.
11. Kimber Select wire to speakers.
12. Totem Manitoo speakers
Below are my quasi raw observation scribbled down during the audition, only slightly cleaned up. I am detailing each musical selection change and
each equipment change. Redbook should be assumed, unless specified otherwise.
Yo Yo Ma: Vivaldi Cello (Sony)
equipment is still cold. We are starting on ARC Ref 3 with DCS P8I.
No glare but slightly dark. First cut
Cello Double Concerto -- 1st movement (Allegro):
detectable blooming bump on basso continuo. Bass line could be slightly tighter.
2nd movement (Adagio):
excellent sweet mid range. good harmonics.
harpsichord very clear. Still basso continuo on cello slightly bloated.
5th track. slight glassiness digital on upper strings. Confused on tutti forte (F).
track 7: Now system warming up. huge 3D sound stage. good instrument images. Not ultimate resolution on low level, detail (e.g. sound of positif pipe
organ traction could be more in evidence).
Dvorak Cello Concerto -- Munch piatigorsky (remastered SACD RCA Living stereo)
track 1
No glare. Slight congestion in crescendo.
glorious clarinet. very good not perfect sound stage
Sounds from backwall hall and instrument decay can be heard during cello solo silences in 2nd movement.
Slightly boxy perhaps on cello G string? Let's remember this was recorded in 1957.
Very distinct interplay with woodwinds. Can hear each instrument clearly with air around each instrument.
Dvorak 9th Symphony -- Fritz reiner and Chicago Symphony Orch. (RCA SACD Remastered Living Stereo) 2nd movement:
Tape hiss can be heard distinctly. This is a recording artifact.
Initial fanfare is not convincing -- Only moderately dynamic and played too fast compared to Bernstein performance: Also slightly closed in. This is a
performance/recording problem, not equipment problem.
After fanfare stage opens up to enormous proportions on English Horn solo. Glorious is the word.
The top end is perhaps just slightly rolled off. Yet greatly musical
Dvorak Piano Quintet Op. 81: H. Nakamura (Pf.), Tokyo String Quartet:
1st movement.
Very liquid. Slightly dark. Breathing sounds.
Slight glare on fortissimo (ff) upper strings.
2nd movement.
Great 3D sound stage, atmosphere instrument images and presence.
Giant image of the viola.
Very controlled piano, liquid.
Some breathing sounds from the players.
Piano is glorious.
Still perceive Slight muddiness in the bass background.
Discovered at this point that I was not sitting in the sweet spot. Moved chair forward 14 inches and left by 8 inches. Consultant also moved some
speakers that were sitting 13 inches behind the port of the Manitus. All of a sudden residual problems were largely fixed.
Returned to 1st movement of quintet:
Bloating on cello has largely disappeared. Cello lower C and G strings are now tight. Great image with a dark sense of the 'wood'.
Returning to 2nd movement.
More detail, Cleaner/grander cello. Greater imaging.
Even more real piano than before.
Can hear still a very Slight upper glare.
Background bass line much better, not yet perfect. Still slightest bump in mid bass.
Change of preamp. Now using VAC Renaissance Signature II.
Cardas hex link 5C power chord
Dvorak quintet Op. 81 1st movement.
Sound is more open than on Ref 3, but also more 'surfacy'.
Sound stage is a little narrower and somewhat two-dymensional compared to Ref 3. Definitely less sound stage depth.
There may be a little more detail in the treble and a slightly tighter bass, at the cost of a fairly leaner midrange. Sound is slightly more 'in your face'
Does Ref 3 sound a little more musical? Or is VAC more 'realistic?'
Changed power chord for VAC to Synergistic Research Designer ref 2 Master coupler. It's own active biasing has not been plugged in.
There is more definition. Still I may like ARC better for musicality, imaging, overall emotional impact of treble, mid, bass.
Quintet 2nd movement.
Very open reasonably good staging and imaging.
Breathing sounds, slightly better than ARC. Slightly tighter bass line?
Lighter/leaner sound than ARC.
Good harmonics on piano sostenuto arpeggios.
Less sense of spatiality than ARC.
Dvorak Cello Concerto: Munch and Piatigorsky.
1st movement:
More tape hiss sound than in ARC: This simply means VAC is slightly more revealing than ARC.
More forward treble than in ARC.
I hear definite congestion in the treble register strings on crescendo.
More glare in trumpet fortissimo (ff).
More surfacy, two dimensional.
Less air around instruments.
I hear some glassiness and congestion, especially on 'tuttis'.
Bass slightly tighter than ARC Ref 3.
not yet convinced of Ren Sig II.
Back to ARC Ref 3 with its own stock power chord. Ref 3 uses 20 Amp IEC: Synergistic Res chord is 15 Amps and can't be used.
Still on Dvorak Cello Concerto.
Definitely more dimensionality than VAC
Sounds more like an orchestra in a real concert hall with a stage made from wood, rather than a lot of instruments suspended in mid air like on VAC.
At this point the consultant discovers that Ref 3 had been running 'single ended' on the XLR connector all this time. Changed to real balanced signal.
Listened again to fragments of Dvorak's Cello concerto 1st and 2nd movements:
I hear even more music.
Even greater sense of the stage
Back to Dvorak Piano quintet 1st and 2nd movements.
truly great stage, air.
Sounds perhaps just slightly dark for some taste, but enormously musical.
Has overall more depth than VAC Ren Sig II. Not talking only about sound stage or location of the instruments. Talking also about the sense of
richness of the instruments extending from the high treble down to the bass register, now without obvious mid-bass bloating. The midrange is well. . .
glorious.
Seems instruments have a story to tell, Instruments more like people?
Removing Preamplifier from the system. Now running DCS directly into the Rowland 302. Volume controlled on DCS attenuator.
Slightly lighter sound than with ARC Ref 3.
Still truly gorgeous. Lots of 3D stage.
Still extremely liquid.
May be not as warm as with ARC Ref 3. Still beautiful.
No great congestion even in FF.
Dvorak Quintet 2nd movement:
Stage almost as great as with ARC.
Touch less player's breathing than on ARC after optimization?
Touch less body in mid strings.
Greater sense of completeness, 3D, imaging than on VAC Ren Sig II
Perhaps slightly less involving, than with ARC Ref 3, but would live with it happily.
Still sounds right.
Incredibly clean. ARC has an edge on involvement. Pure DCS has an edge on clarity.
Piano arpeggios with lots of overtones.
Dvorak Cello Concerto: Munch and Piatigorsky first movement:
Again lighter sound. Slightly glassy on full upper strings.
Falls apart a little more on FF.
Tends to be better on soft passages than in tutti.
Soft passages with plenty of air.
Delicate cello sound but not earthy. A little childlike cello. Or perhaps sounding more ethereal, like a Baroque cello style.
Still I get the impression that DCS P8I driving the Rowland 302 directly is perfectly valid and wonderful in its own way. I have the feeling this may very
well be preferable for Jazz ensembles and New Age music, were absolute speed and nimbleness are a must.
We disconnect now the DCS P8I and connect Accuphase DP-77. I am told there is no direct-to-amp capability, so we insert ARC Ref 3 in the system.
Powerchord on Accuphase is Synergistic PC same as used on VAC Ren Sig II.
ARC Ref 3 is still on own stock power chord.
Still on Dvorak Cello Concerto 1st and 2nd movement:
Definitely audibly glassier than DCS in tutti fortissimo (FF). More colored 'digital' sound than DCS: I can hear it on violins, brass, flutes.
No denying: great air around instruments. Not really harsh, yet it reminds me of a clearly digital sound 'of old'.
back to Piano quintet one last time for a couple of minutes:
Perhaps airier than DCS, lighter. Yet it sounds like instruments have less 'personality'. Perhaps sound disembodied. Midrange is leaner than DCS.
Very well defined leaner bass. Overall less character, but still with that slight digital coloration.
Conclusions?
I was surprised: I found a lot of coherence on Ref 3 with phenomenal imaging and musicality where I was expecting a trace of the silvery gray diffuse
sound stage of the older Ref 2 Mk. 2. Furthermore, ARC Ref 3 was likely hindered by its own 20 Amp stock power chord, rather than being helped by a more upscale PC which could be used
on VAC only.
I was not surprised by the relatively slight imaging shortcomings of the VAC Ren Sig II, as this seemed to be a frequent finding on Audiogon for this now almost discontinued model. On the
other hand, I was not prepared by Ren Sig II's relative upper glare, at least on the system I auditioned and was expecting a richer sound signature.
We should consider though that, even though we were not employing a stock power chord on VAC, the Synergistics Research was deployed with its active shield turned off, and the Cardas chord on Ren Sig II was not Cardas's current highest grade.
The DCS P8I was truly delightful. Rich and eloquent when coupled with the ARC Ref 3, which suited best my musical and sound taste, and was my very
favorite configuration during this session. but even more nimble and airy on its own, likely perfect for more contemporary musical selections.
The Accuphase DP-77 sounded very pleasing in so many ways, but still is to my ears an immature sounding product, in an absolutely spectacular
mechanical package. The box can be only rivaled in outer build quality by the Esoteric X-01, which I know well and love dearly, but did not have the opportunity to listen
directly in this setting.
The quest continues: prior to a final decision, I still look forward to A/B ARC Ref 3 against the newer VAC Ren II. I am already familiar with Ren II: its staging and imaging prowess are second to none. I am hoping to comparing directly its musicality, extension, midrange, sweetness, staging and imaging with that of ARC Ref 3. My hope is to be able to listen to both these through my favorite Shuniata Anaconda power chords, both linestages driven by a Teac Esoteric X-01, which still remains my favorite player, and with which I am most familiar.
Finally, would my preference have been different today, if both ARC Ref 3 and Vac Ren Sig II had been connected to AC through Shunyata Anaconda Alpha? And would the updated Ref 3 sporting 6550C tubes and bypass caps further sway me towards this linestage, or would the update have an opposite effect on me?
I am now looking forward to the gang's comments!
