New Audio Research Reference 150 SE

If the KT150's work in the 75, 150 and 250 and they do, why do you need modifications to make the change optimal? I suspect most of the benefit is in the tubes themselves and they are cheaper to buy at Upscale Audio. You would need some brave soul to compare a cooking version of one of the ref series amps, that amp with KT150 tubes and a factory modified SE version.

It does sound a great deal of money to me, but it seems to explain why ARC has refused to say if the 150 tubes will work in the Reference series amps, for the last year. Sorry if this offends you ARC fans out there and I do love my Ref 75, but the company's main aim does seem to be to wring the last bit of cash out of loyal customers, they can.

David ... I ask myself the same question. I have about 50 to 75 hours on my KT-150s. Yes ... they sound better than the KT-120s, but not good enough IMO to justify the cost of $100 per tube.

I may be among the first group of schmucks to spring for the SE upgrade, but I feel like a schmuck for even considering the investment.

And btw, $5000 for tubes and "proprietary" parts, ... I hope they throw the snake oil in too.

BIF

I auditioned the Galileo 150 amp yesterday driving the Maggie 3.7's. The combination was heavenly. What really is impressive is that when I saw that the subwoofer was off, and all of that palpable bass was coming from the panels. The sound product is reference level in my opinion. If I only had the room for them, I would purchase the combo.

Tennisdoc, how big should a room be to take proper advantage for the 3.7s?

This was at an Audio Research Dealer's secondary room. Don't know the dimensions, but size of an ordinary living room.