Audio Research Ref 3 Opinions

Dear Randy,

I think that I can understand where you are coming from & why you feel the need to defend the ARC Ref 1.
Yes, my conclusion is not totally scientific but it is not out-of-line either.
I own power amps from the very same company that this fellow's power amp was from. That power amp is the flagship unit while mine is 1 below. In fact, knowledge gained from the flagship unit has trickled down to my model of the power amp. So, I know that "house sound" very well. So, when I heard the music in his system, I knew that I the sound I was hearing was NOT characteristic of that power amp & that something else was compromising the sound.
The R645 speakers: they belonged to my friend who accompanied me to this person's house. Thus, my friend knew the sound of these speakers intimately & he told me that those very speakers sounded much better during his ownership than what we were hearing that evening.
That leaves the CD player - Linn Genki & the stock ARC Ref 1. I have no prior experience with the Genki BUT with all the pro reviews I have read & with all the descriptive positive feedback from users I have read, it was reasonable to guess that the Linn Genki had very good sound overall.
Cabling was Groneberg Quattro. I own the Groneberg TS Premium in my system to this present day & I think I know their sound very well too.
By process of elimination it came down to the ARC Ref 1.
BTW, my conclusion jives with many others' as well. Of course, it doesn't jive with each & every person's. This is audio..........how could it!!!!
The friend who accompanied me owns a ARC SP-6A which has been heavily modified by 2 diff. people. It has superb sound by today's standards & will give many $2000-$3000 a solid run for their money. In fact, it far out-does that stock ARC Ref 1 by miles. The comparison is not entirely fair: heavily modified SP-6A vs. stock Ref 1.
For the price tag of the stock Ref 1, I don't think that its sound is worth it. I stand by my conclusion: it's not off-the-cuff & it doesn't mean to diss ARC. It's the way I hear it.
Just FYI: I do not believe that the latest model = the greatest! In fact, I'm more likely to believe the contrary. Read some of my other posts before you accuse me of this!

I have no prior experience with the Genki BUT with all the pro reviews I have read & with all the descriptive positive feedback from users I have read, it was reasonable to guess that the Linn Genki had very good sound overall...By process of elimination it came down to the ARC Ref 1.

Riiiight.

I believe this error in inductive reasoning is known as the "Fallacy of Exclusion." :-)

Bombaywalla:

I think your flawed logic shows quite a bit of audio inexperience. I have heard the Ref 1 in many different systems and I find it a very musical preamp. It may not be every one's cup of tea, but it is a very fine preamp nevertheless.

Bombaywalla,

Hopefully you will get a chance to hear some of the products, that you did not like in your friend's system, in the context of another system.....perhaps your own. Claiming that because you heard one power amp from a company, you know the house sound of that company, is not realistic. Many companies, ARC included, have a way of abruptly changing from one classic sound to another that is nothing remotely close only to come full circle and return to what they had a decade before. And the idea that a top-of-the-line model's "technology" trickles down to the lesser costly models is something we hope to be the case, but again, I have seen this not be the case several times. Several models in a line can ultimately not sound at all similar.

You said the sound was mediocre but you never detailed what made you come to this conclusion. Could it simply have been the room?

And because you know the Groneberg cable sound so well, you have eliminated this? Huh? Time and time again, I have found the IC between line and amp to be the most critical. With ARC gear, a couple of my favorite cable lines, SilverAudio and HarmonicTech just did not work well from line to amp but were excellent tonearm and speaker cabling. The NBS or Cardas Golden Cross were much preferred in this link. But elsewhere, I liked the SilverAudio IC over the Cardas.

What an IC sounds like from DAC to line or phono stage to line, is not necessarily what it sounds like from line to amp. So no, the "sound" of the cable can not simply be known; it is greatly influenced by the components it connects.

Concerning the Ref1, I was a long time (8+ years) owner of the LS5 which I preferred over the Ref1 because of the LS5's more "warmth" and "bloomy" sound. This difference was subtle but I liked the LS5. The Ref1 was clearly more resolving and tonally coherent. In the overall scheme of things, they were nearly identical. And neither of these products can be blamed for being the cause of a mediocre sounding system unless there was something severely wrong elsewhere. As GMorris states, it might not be someone's type of sound, but a poor product it is not.

And what do you mean the modified SP-6 out distanced the stock Ref1? Did you actually compare these two products in the same system? Or are you judging the sound of each in the context of two different systems? And what was the difference? ... tonality, noise, resolution, frequency extreme extension? Blanket statements of this is "better" than that have no value without further details to the differences. And if the comparison was not in the same system, preferably right there at the same time, it is silly to claim anything about one product against the other.

I have owned several components in the system you described and the one product I would question is the PH3. This is the most fatiguing phono stage I have heard in a long time. It sounds nice at the start but quickly had me eager to try any number of other such products. The PH2 destroyed the overrated PH3 by significant margins in lower noise and neutrality to just name two. The Ref1 deserves more than the PH3 and for that matter, the 17D (which I also owned at one time).

One thing I have learned many times is to NEVER judge a product in too critical of a manner unless I can take it home and try it out in my system for at least a few days to hear how it compares to what I already own and to the sound for which I am familiar.

Rather than look for a single scapegoat for mediocre sound, I would suggest it could easily have more to do with a poorly configured and setup system, than the fault(s) of any one element in the system. It is like someone getting a copy of Stereophile, buying all "Class A" rated components and claiming they have a musical system. It's just not that simple. In fact you're more likely to find musical success to do this at the "Class B" level.

John

Ok guys: you bring up some valid arguments!

Jafox: I'm 100% sure of the power amp in that the technology of the flagship line has (so far) trickled down to my model # of power amps. I know this 'cuz the person I bought my amps from upgraded to the flagship line. I conversed w/ him after he had the amps for a while. 2ndly, I've chatted w/ Odyssey Audio on this matter: I was told the same thing. Hence I'm inclined to believe it.
Yes, I, too, did not like the sound of his stock Linn Sondek LP12 thru the PH3. Clean sound but same sort of flat/2-D sound as thru the CDP. OK, I admit, it could have been the room.
Maybe I'll get to hear this ARC Ref 1 again. Suffice it to say that this time around it was not my cup-of-tea.