Has anyone heard the Ref 3?

I have listened to the ARC Ref 3 and compared it to a VAC Renaissance Signature II. To make the story short. .. I am in lust with the Ref 3. You will find my rather detailed findings starting at:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?aamps&1123254379&openfrom&58&4#58
I'd love for you to post your opinions about the ref 3 as well.

Yes, Agaffer was kind enough to bring his Ref 3 over for a comparison to my LS25 MK II. I was anxious to hear whether all the excitement about the Ref 3 was significant enough for the substantially higher cost. Also, I have not done a head on head preamp comparison before and was curious how noticeable the differences might be.

Here is my system: CD 3 MK II (running balanced), Teres 265 with PH5 (running single ended), the LS25 MK II, and VT 100 MK III into the Vandy 5As. Each piece is on a separate 20 amp star grounded circuit with power conditioning. The room is large with a cathedral ceiling (33 D, 18 W, 13.5 ave. H).

We started with the CD 3 and LS25 MK II listening to a variety of jazz and vocals. The imaging of the system is moderately forward, incredibly detailed with very precise imaging of each artist from left to right, and throws a soundstage which is very high, and frequently well outside of and behind the 5As. The sound is quite uniform and neutral, benefiting from the extremely high coherence of the 5As.

After some acclamation, we switched to the Ref 3, and repeated the same material. It was clear from the outset that the Ref 3 was distinctly different. It has a slightly deeper (but not wider) soundstage, and more noticeably, has much more refined and “rounded” instrumental and voice images. They seem to have more depth and realism, like being a cylinder instead of a plane. The overall presentation was more liquid and musical.

We then switched to the Teres and went through the same process. This time the effect was even more dramatic, and so obvious that I think I could have picked the Ref 3 every time in a blind test. I can’t explain why, however, it might have had something to do with the fact that the CD 3 was using XLR and the PH5 was using RCA. At any rate, my vinyl had never before sounded so incredibly real. We could easily hear instrumental artifacts that were much more articulated and distinct with the Ref 3. I found the overall presentation more natural, musical, and refined.

At this point we just began to enjoy the Ref 3 with a variety of vinyl such as “Genius Loves Company” with Ray Charles, “The Well” with Jennifer Warnes, and “Chester and Lester”, with Chet Atkins and Les Paul. Getting lost in the music was taking precedence over any further comparison.

Later that evening, I went back in alone to listen to the LS25, and confirmed it now seemed a bit disappointing, with a somewhat flatter, less engaging sound. A test like this is a dangerous thing to do, since I was quite happy with my current system and now can’t stop thinking about what is missing.

My conclusion is that the excitement over the Ref 3 is real and ARC has made a significant step in the right direction. Others have reported a similar improvement over the Ref 2s. So, now I need to start saving my pennies.

Zargon, I know what you are talking about when you speak of the Ref 3. I have been questing a replacement for my valiant ARC LS2B for the last 5 years: Spectral (do not remember which) seemed full of artifacts, ARC LS25 II was not involving enough, ARC Ref 2 Mk. 2 was a mixed bag, VTL 7.5 was too soft, Bat VK51 SE was too dark,Boulder 1012 I liked, VAC Ren Sig II I found shrill, Vac Ren II I found truly lovely instead. . . but when I heard the ARC Ref 3 I truly fell in love. One final audition in October on my own system this time, as well as on a friend's system to compare with his fabulous VAC Ren II. . . and it will be decision time.

Over the past week I've had the LS25mkII and Ref3 in my system, as I'm looking to upgrade my SP16L. Sources are a hard drive feeding an ARC DAC5 and a VPI Scout feeding an ARC PH3, and an ARC VS110 drives my Totem Hawks. I'm very happy with my system, but I'm looking for upgrades that make it sound "bigger".

Like Zargon, I found the Ref3 to be more detailed in nearly every respect. However, in the context of my system the LS25 had a far smoother and more balanced sound. It sounds to me like the rest of Zargon's system was up to the standards that the Ref3 sets. For me, I'm probably going to wait a while because I feel that the Ref3 can be ruthless.

Hmm, is ruthless the right word? Perhaps not, maybe unbalanced is better, but regardless I'd recommend thinking carefully about the context you place the Ref3 in otherwise you may find yourself in rapid upgrade mode to bring the rest of your system up to what this amazing preamp can do.

Gunther, the term 'ruthless' is probabably ruthlesly accurate when speaking about the Ref 3. The creature reveals so much information that shortcomings up and down the chain may become more apparent. By the way, was the Ref 3 fully broken in? If it were not, that may have accounted for some residual grit.