ARC or other Pre?

The ARC Ref. 3 is within spitting distance of the Ref. 5, so if you can't afford the Ref. 5, the Ref. 3 should tide you over until you can.

My friend has steadily progressed from the ARC Ref. 1, to the Ref. 2, then to the Ref. 3, (which was a big leap forward, IMHO), and then finally to the Ref. 5. So, I have a fair amount of experience with the ARC line up of preamps. The Ref. 3 sounds very close to the Ref. 5, lacking only a very small degree of quickness and transparency. Other than that, they are virtually identical sonically, IMHO.

Another good preamp is the VTL TL-6.5 Signature preamp. This is a hybrid preamp, with only two tubes, (2~12AU7 tubes). It is very similar to the ARC Ref. 3 and Ref. 5 sonically. It too is fully balanced. Basically it is a VTL TL-7.5 series 2 all shoved into one large box. (And I do mean a large box. I bought the TL-6.5 and it barely fits on my stereo rack.) Used it runs about $4-5K. (It beats out, albeit only very slightly, my previous preamp, the Ayre K-1xe, which is another good fully balanced preamp. Used the Ayre goes for around $3K, without the optional phono stage.)

Here is a link where someone compares the ARC Ref. 3 and the VTL TL-6.5 head to head.

ARC Ref. 3 vs. VTl TL 6.5

Good Luck in your search!

From what I have read, the LS 27 nips at the heels of the Ref 5 (not SE) and probably sounds a little better than the Ref 3. Don't see too many LS 27s for sale, but occassionally one or two hit the "for sale" sheets.

Is there really that much difference between the models, such as the LS27 and say the LS26? And the Ref3 versus the Ref5? We're talking mid-20th century technology here, folks -- there are no real breakthroughs happening here. Something about a company that is constantly releasing new models and new "upgrades" makes me a little suspicious. Are they simply playing games, because they know they have a group of core customers who will go out and buy every new model that is released? I am just asking the question. As opposed to a company that is so confident in their designs that they only release new models when they have something truly new to say (Pass Labs for example).

I'm not attacking ARC very much -- I own an LS16 mkII myself! (also own a Pass).

I'm just wondering if we are exaggerating the differences too much.

^^ ARC has an internal policy of a new product announcement every 90 days. It might be an amplifier, DAC, preamp- whatever.

Abrew and Ralph ... I've been through a lot of ARC gear. SP16 >> SP17 >> Ref 3 >> Ref 5 >> Ref 5 SE. VS-110 >> VS-115 >> Ref 150. PH-7 >> PH-8. Ref CD-7 >> Ref CD-8.

Not sure I can say "one size fits all" as far as whether every jump either has been a real improvement or not. Having said that, I do think the Ref 5 SE is a far better sounding unit than the SP16, by a real long shot. Ditto re the Ref 150 as compared to the VS-110, and the CD-8 compared to the CD-7.

OTOH and IMO, any sonic differences between the PH-7 and PH-8 were slight nuances. A little more so between the Ref 3 to the Ref 5. Frankly ... I regretted some of the changes as not being worth the money, IMO.

In contrast, I think the Ref 5 SE and Ref 150 are better sounding than what I had immediately before. Earth shaking?? Like what planet have I been living on for the last 61 years?? ... Give me a break.

But ... looking back over the whole journey, I think ARC has made incremental improvements that add up to something special. I'm sure Ralph can speak better to this than me because he designs and builds "Class A" gear. I surmise that technology and materials know-how has improved over the last 30 to 40 years. I gotta believe that transistors and other passives are simply better than what was out there in the early days.

Ralph ... your thoughts???