Audio Research Ref 5 preamp

Hi Guys,

Very interesting discussion.

I assume the comparisons made till now are based on the original ARC tube configuration. I know that exchange of the ARC tubes by NOS tubes has also a remarkable impact. Has anybody had a chance to compare REF5 and REF3 with "tungsol blackplate" and the 6H30 DR's "diamonds". Next question of course will be what happens if you change the original ARC tubes in the REF5 with the same NOS tubes!

Personally, I was never that motivated to spend time rolling tubes. I did it once with a PH3SE and sure, the Mullard NOS tubes I used did seem to improve things, etc. etc. I spent time analyzing the differences and how to quantify and qualify them in words. To me, tube rolling is an ancillary swirl, as it were. I started wondering if I was actually getting unused NOS tubes, and if they were worth the premium $. It all seemed like time taken away from simply enjoying the music.

AR uses tubes they can easily get. I am inclined to conclude that that's good enough for me. All that said, however, if someone were to take the time to make the comparisons and had a strong recommendation, I would be inclined to listen up and maybe consider for the next tube replacement. I welcome others' points of view and perspective.

Both set-ups at RMAF 2009 with Ref 5 were fantastic. One with Vandersteen Model 7 and the other with the Wilson Sashas. Both had a complete stack of Audio Research Reference components: CD8, Ref 5, Ref 2 Phono, and Ref 110 amp.

Do you know which cables were being used with these ARC systems?

I agree with Sdrenslow that the ARC gear sounded good - especially on the Vandys. I am not a fan of the ARC Ref 3 (even with Vandy 5A), but I'm guessing the Ref5 is better since I loved the sound at the show.