ARC Ref 75 vs. Ref 75 SE

OKAY ... full disclosure .. I am an "ARC cheerleader" and proud of it.

On the reliability issue ... I've had an SP6. An SP-14. a Classic 60, a REF-75 and now the REF-75se. I've had all of their phono stages from the PH-3 through to my present PH-8. I've had their CD players from the CD-3 through to my present CD-7se. I used the SP-14 until I upgraded to my present REF-3. I ALWAYS go for the upgrades ... and have never been disappointed with them as the improvements are always significant enough to justify the price of the upgrade.

In all of these years, and with all of this equipment, I've had only one resistor taken out by a failing tube and that was a KT120 in my REF-75. I took it to a fairly local tech who does ARC warrantee work. No problem other than it took a while getting it back.

In the meantime, I had my regular tech go through the Classic 60 and give it a good going over. He replaced the power switch (damaged in the '92 earthquake). He replaced the large capacitors because their measurements were way down. He said that this is normal in old amps. I've owned the CL-60 since the early 80's .. and never a problem what so ever, and the damned thing plays MUSIC! The CL-60 rests under a table in my listening room to be used as a spare. As old as it is, I can't bear to sell it. It just sounds too good.


Other than that one resistor, I have NEVER had a reliability issue with ARC equipment. All I've ever done is replace the tubes when they age. No burn marks on any of my circuit boards either.

I have a reliable source at ARC ... and he told me that they tested the KT-150's for over 5000 hours, on 24/7, with no failures prior to approving them for a replacement in the REF amps that were using KT-120's.

It always amuses me when some guys in these forums knock ARC products. I'm sure they are being very sincere in their assessments. But, here's a question for them ... Should ARC just stop improving their products and call it a day? Or ... should they continue with their R&D and offer upgrades to their customers who are willing to pay for them? Personally, I see nothing nefarious at work here on ARC's part.

Well said Oregonpapa!

Thank you.

What I see is that typically, manufacturers come out with "new, better" products every two years or so. This to me is to keep their name in the papers and especially the magazines that review products. This is true for solid state and tube manufactures. Pass labs, Jeff Rowland, etc. Just because AR provides an "upgrade" to their products doesn't make this any different. I prefer the upgrade than a wholesale issuance of a "brand new and better" product.

The new and better product is really not, just new and different tubes, different capacitors, upgrades in the power supply, etc. But basically the same circuit design.

Also, the resale value of upgradeable products is higher than the resale value of completely discontinued products.

To me (in my humble opinion), it would appear wayyyy more disingenuous if a company came out with some new and better product and discontinued the other product after a year or so.

You have to get products out of the door eventually. To keep doing R&D forever would just be stupid in a business sense. So, some bright Engineer finds a better capacitor or better tube a year or so later. But the basic circuit design is very good. I would upgrade the existing product, instead of coming out with a new product that is basically the same.

In my opinion, the AR REF250 is hands down the best amp I have ever heard. I imagine the circuit design is the same for the REF75 and REF150. Why come out with entirely new amps? Add the simple upgrades, offer them to existing customers also, and move on.

I choose to not believe that AR would intentionally come out with a "subpar" product with the final intention of offering an upgrade later. What is the point of that? They could have just as easily come out with an "entirely" new product (that was basically the upgrade) and called it something else.

It is a great company, that puts many people to work and in direct comparisons with other "great" products, they are equal to or better. So, they are doing a great job.

The exception to the simple upgrade theory is the Mark Levinson 23.5. That was a wholesale upgrade that incorporated major changes. Yet Mark Levinson still considered it an upgrade and actually offered this upgrade to owners of 23 units. That too me was really cool.

Expensive, but cool.

enjoy

I have ARC gear so I am not a hater. I was speaking to a local well known tech a couple of weeks ago and I told him what I had. I told him I had a current ARC preamp but I have been thinking about upgrading my older amp. He told me he feels the older ARC gear is built better than the new gear and also sounds better. I found that an Interesting statement from an authorized service tech that works on a lot of different well known product.