Visited with my friend (Gayle) in Austin and did some more informal a/b comparisons of JRDG Capri with the ARC Ref 3. Capri was powered through a Shunyata Anaconda Helix Alpha. No PC1 external PFC device was used, as I prefer the Capri without PC1. ARC Ref 3 used a Purist Anniversary PC. Mismatch was intentional. . . I do not like Anniversary on Capri but much prefer Anaconda. . . conversely we all agreed that Anniversary works better than Anaconda on Ref 3. Rest of system consisted of the latest DCS megastack, Lam hybrid monos, B&W 801s. ICs were PAD Anniversary. We tried as much as possible to warm up Capri before playing time. . . this typically succeeds only partially. . . Capri really needs some playing time to achieve optimum performance and that was clear for the first 20 minutes of playing where wecouldn't help noticing some congestion. For test tracks we used my usual Dvorak 9th Symph 2nd movement with Bernstein and the Israel, and Edgar Meyer on Bass playing the Prelude and Allemande from Bach's 5th cello suite. Gayle supplied 2 excellent jazz tracks.
In Dvorak, the Capri appeared to supply a larger/deeper and more transparent sound stage than the Ref 3. There was a delicacy and sense of ease to the presentation that I personally preferred over Ref 3. Bass was of course better defined and controlled than in Ref 3. Overall authority was very similar. I suspect that harmonic development during the initial brass fanfare was better defined on Capri. Those familiar with this recording know that there is some raggedness in the recording during FFF, and I still give the nod on Capri for controlling the same. Macro dynamics is comparable, but I may give the not in microdynamics to Capri. It is worth mentioning that both Capri and Ref 3 are relatively neutral devices that are somewhat atypical of their SS and tube underlying technology. . . while Capri is slightly more 'neutral' sounding, Ref 3 is slightly warmer and perhaps darker sounding. . . . but neither of them epytomizes the stereotypical sound of their heritage.
Edgar Meyer on Capri was incredibly 'nimble' and open with rosyn noise and harmonic complexity galore; bass was deep, musical, and always tight; overall presentation was both expansive and emotional. If I can make a criticism to the rendition, is that I felt the high harmonics made perhaps the track slightly 'too open' for my personal taste. . . however I am not in a position to decide on the actual 'correctness' of the reproduction. Definitely darker and somewhat warmer was the Ref 3, with a clear sense of the majestic. Bass was deep, but somewhat more flaring than that of the Capri. Overtones were also in evidence, if with a darker hue than on Capri. Microdynamics was also clearly evident like on Capri. Both devices show excellent ability to reproduce decay--perhaps more muscular in Ref 3, while Capri was perhaps slightly more filegreed.
In the end, these are both magnificent linestages, Capri just slightly to the SS side of neutrality, while Ref 3 leaning slightly towards the warmer side of a tube neutrality. While I personally prefer the overall sound of the Capri, I notice occasional marginal blemishes, such as the upper overtones in Meyer, and some similar minor quibbles I have had with some piano recordings. Yet, if the little Capri is this good, I can only wonder at the performance of the upcoming JRDG Criterion
In fairness though, if you prefer the slightly warmer sound of tubes, you would more likely prefer the Ref 3 over the Capri. Scott O. who was also present at our little extravaganza, will likely express his preference for Ref 3.
Gayle will hopefully add his own comments to the listening session.
