2. amps-preamps
  3. 1423631234

ARC Ref3 or McIntosh C2300/2500

Can anyone comment on their actual experiences with these two pre amps?
I am considering an upgrade to my Audio Research LS26 and these are the ones I am considering. Both priced similarly on the used market, the Mac offers more features such as Phono and DAC (C2500) which is useful to me. But most important is how they sound. What I am looking for is more the "magic" tube midrange sound (which the LS26 does not have) as well as the wide and deep soundstage that I do have.
Just to compare, I put in a older VTL 2.5 pre amp and the midrange was much more to my liking than that of the ARC which sounded a bit "sterile" and "analytical" as the reviewers say. But the VTL did not have the wide soundstage nor quite as deep, fast, and top as the ARC.
Other gear :
McIntosh MC402 amp with Wilson WP6 speakers
ARC CD3, ARC PH5, VPI Traveler, Benchmark DAC. Transparent cables.
I listen to all sources, mostly classic rock, Jazz,
Thank you
vdosc
jafant's avatar
jafant
19,915 posts
 
Vdosc-

having heard all pre-amps plus the ARC Ref5 SE models in your query, I can very strongly suggest (w/o hesitation) the ARC Ref 5SE. This is the one you want! Save your time and money on the rest. Oddly enough I felt the Ref5 SE sounded best when mated w/ a Bryston power amp on Wilson loudspeakers. Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
vdosc OP
51 posts
 
This is all great information! If I could afford to, I would have two or three different pre-amps (or complete systems) here at one time to really compare.
Although I would never get anything else done ;) I don't have any good dealers near me that cary either brand much less both to try and compare, so I must buy to try. Also I still have my older ARC VT100MKII power amp, which is not bad at all, however I like the Mac 402 better with the Wilson WP6. It may not sound as "warm" in the mids as the ARC but It has gobs of clean power , which translate to better attack, tighter bass, also there seems to be better imaging, and decay on instruments and reverb, etc. I have not had a ARC REF amp in my system yet, and I am sure it would be great, but they are at this time not in the budget. Also I really like the look of the Mac!
vdosc OP
51 posts
 
I should ad that I am trying to keep my budget around $5K for this ,
hence my interest in REF 3 and or McIntosh C2500 range.
Thank you
minorl
1,016 posts
 
You should be able to find a decent used REF3 for $5k. For that money, I don't think much comes close. This really is a very good pre-amp. Just make sure there is still life on the tubes. The REF 3 has a tube life counter that will tell you.

enjoy
bifwynne
2,206 posts
 
Can't speak about the MAC, but I used to own the Ref 3. Wow ... what a piece of kit.

I also agree with the comments above re the Ref 5. I moved up to the Ref 5, but was quite surprised that it was NOT in a different league as compared to the Ref 3. I since upgraded my Ref 5 to the SE and think the improvements are very noticeable.

So I vote for the Ref 3 ... or if you can find an LS 27, another good choice.

I happen to agree with the comments that ARC tube gear does not sound tubey. It is warm, neutral, open and very enjoyable. Some may call that analytical, but I think the use of terms is just quibbling about taste.

If your budget permits, I would think about upgrading your phono pre to the PH-7. Forget the PH-8. Not worth the bucks. Also, keep an eye peeled for a nice deal on a CD-5, which is the SS version of the Ref CD-8. I own the CD-8 which is a very nice CDP. The CD-5 and CD-8 both use the same Burr Brown DAC chip set.

But the bottom line is that either the Ref 5 or the LS 27 would make for a fine center to your rig.

We can talk about amps in another thread.

Cheers,

Bruce
More to discover