BAT Equipment vs Audio Research

I've heard the BAT 150SE and was very impressed with the low noise floor, which I was told has much to do with its balanced topology. I was also told BATs power tranformers store large amounts of current and this helps dynamics. In addition, the BATs supposably use higher quality parts.

I agree, it's seems there is a knee jerk response to certain mainstream products. I have certain pieces of gear that are eclectic/esoteric, but sound great to me. Some mainstream gear sounds poor. The REF series is superior to the rest of the already very good ARC gear. The 300's bested the 600's in shear sonics without any noticeable power decrement; same weight and authority with an incredible soundstage and lifelike presentation that only the Atma-Spheres rivaled, although the BAT's I listened to were very good also. The 300's midrange is unspeakabley real, arguably on par with the best SET's, but it is at the extremes that the 300's really shine, taut,deep bass and airy, extended highs, and that's what made my decision to nab the 300's as opposed to the aforementioned amps and a host of others I auditioned. To each his own, your ears will let you know what pushes their audio nirvana buttons. Have fun in the search. Cheers, Mark

I believe Mes is right: ARC's Ref series is so superior to much of their regular stuff. The Ref2/Ref300 is very musical yet transparent, and avoids the kind of dry/white/grainy texture of much of ARC's regular series. I think the BAT sounds great-I recently bought one myself-detailed, dynamic, quiet, yet naturally balanced, though it's not in the league with the Ref series in quality(or price). Do your homework: Try both out on your own stuff then buy the better.

I also agree that its at the extremes that makes ARC Ref. gear special. Many argue that ARCs midrange is thin. They conclude that since mid-range is the most audible part of the audio spectrum, its what you should be most concerned about. However, its difficult to give up good strong base and extension, as well as transient quickness, for a warm toned, and admittedly, rich mid-range. I am willing to make some trade offs for the SET mid-range, but I am not willing to sacrifice everthing. I become nervous when tube sales reps. talk about the primary importance of midrange because they lose sight of the entire picture.

Pipes- Thin is not an adjective that comes to mind when listening to the 300 MKII's. Clean, yes, but rich, not warm, muddy or syrupy. I too think midrange is nearly all important, but if you can have your cake and eat it....