What's with the trend in amp design?

mep said:
Joe-Didn't you rave about the TAD CR-1s up to the point where you sold them? Weren't your latest pair of McIntosh amps you kept for 34 days "destination amps" and you said good things about them until they headed down the road to their new owner? So now we have you and four or five of your friends who think the Ref 6 was bright. Were these people who own the Ref 6 or people who stopped by your place and heard it in your system?
Click to expand...

Hi Mark,

I had a fully broken in Reference 6 in my system for two weeks that my dealer loaned me. There’s no question that it’s a very fine preamp. In fact, I preferred it to a VAC Master preamp that I brought in for a demo, largely due to its neutrality and broader soundstage.

However, I subsequently purchased a Reference 10 preamp for my system. I observed the Ref 10 preamp to be much smoother and more refined in the treble than the Ref 6. In addition, I found the Ref 10’s overall presentation to be more balanced and have more ease than the Ref 6. So, in my opinion, compared to the Ref 10, the Ref 6 is edgier in the treble, more forward in the soundstage and overall has a more aggressive presentation. YMMV.

Ken
 
kevinkwann said:
There’s a good chance that if your system were more revealing, you’d be able to hear it too.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I appreciate your kind words. I don't remember you ever coming to my house and hearing my system. Please tell us about your system.
 
Alpinist said:
Hi Mark,

I had a fully broken in Reference 6 in my system for two weeks that my dealer loaned me. There’s no question that it’s a very fine preamp. In fact, I preferred it to a VAC Master preamp that I brought in for a demo, largely due to its neutrality and broader soundstage.

However, I subsequently purchased a Reference 10 preamp for my system. I observed the Ref 10 preamp to be much smoother and more refined in the treble than the Ref 6. In addition, I found the Ref 10’s overall presentation to be more balanced and have more ease than the Ref 6. So, in my opinion, compared to the Ref 10, the Ref 6 is edgier in the treble, more forward in the soundstage and overall has a more aggressive presentation. YMMV.

Ken
Click to expand...

Hey Ken. You are comparing a $14k pre to a $30k pre. The Ref 10 should sound better than the Ref 6. The Ref 10 has truly dual mono power supplies that share a single outboard case vice the shared power supply built into the Ref 6. Maybe if I owned a Ref 10 I would come to the same conclusions as you, but it wouldn't take away from the fact that the Ref 6 is a damn fine preamp that many people would consider themselves lucky to own. You have a very nice system by the way.
 
kevinkwann said:
Zero interest.
Click to expand...

Well, you were quite interested to trash my system, but you have never heard my system or stepped a foot in my room. So, it's interesting that you can draw conclusions with no facts and cast aspersions on a system you have never heard.
 
mep said:
Hey Ken. You are comparing a $14k pre to a $30k pre. The Ref 10 should sound better than the Ref 6. The Ref 10 has truly dual mono power supplies that share a single outboard case vice the shared power supply built into the Ref 6. Maybe if I owned a Ref 10 I would come to the same conclusions as you, but it wouldn't take away from the fact that the Ref 6 is a damn fine preamp that many people would consider themselves lucky to own. You have a very nice system by the way.
Click to expand...

Mark,

Thanks for the compliment on my system. Did you read my first paragraph? I think I did write that the Ref 6 is a darn fine preamp. What I was also trying to point out is that the Ref 6 does, in my opinion, have some of the tendencies that Joe mentioned. The degree of these tendencies is certainly debatable. That’s why I wrote, YMMV.

Ken
 
mep said:
Well, you were quite interested to trash my system, but you have never heard my system or stepped a foot in my room. So, it's interesting that you can draw conclusions with no facts and cast aspersions on a system you have never heard.
Click to expand...

Some people may find your defensive, passive-aggressive posts interesting and worthwhile. I'm not one of them.
 
Alpinist said:
Mark,

Thanks for the compliment on my system. Did you read my first paragraph? I think I did write that the Ref 6 is a darn fine preamp. What I was also trying to point out is that the Ref 6 does, in my opinion, have some of the tendencies that Joe mentioned. The degree of these tendencies is certainly debatable. That’s why I wrote, YMMV.

Ken
Click to expand...

Ken-Yes, I read everything you wrote. Did you notice the issues you are describing before the Ref 10 landed in your system or after?
 
kevinkwann said:
Some people may find your defensive, passive-aggressive posts interesting and worthwhile. I'm not one of them.
Click to expand...

You found it interesting enough to comment on this thread about the quality of my system which you have never heard. Meanwhile back at the ranch, you are just one more in a crowd of audiophiles who won't publish details of their system and yet take pot shots at other people's systems. Everyone can draw their own conclusions about people who do this.
 
To be the contrarian here, does it really make sense to discuss the sound of an amplifier without the speaker it is hooked up to? In my experience, it's all about the control of the speaker and the synergy between the two. If you don't get this right, digital vs analog and your preamp don't matter.

Also, isn't it a long-running industry trend for this type of sound? If people didn't like it and rejected it, wouldn't there be less of it? So people must like it. At the same time, another trend that has exploded is vinyl use.
 
mep said:
Ken-Yes, I read everything you wrote. Did you notice the issues you are describing before the Ref 10 landed in your system or after?
Click to expand...

Mark,

I did notice some edginess in the treble when I added the Reference 6. It was more pronounced when I played my Esoteric K-01X than the ARC Reference CD9 that I was also borrowing. But I did hear some treble edge with both sources.

This got me interested in hearing the Reference 10. So I took a trip to JS Audio in Maryland and did a direct comparison of the Ref 6 and Ref 10. After hearing the smoothness and refinement of the Ref 10’s treble, there was no going back. To be fair, I did not really notice the forwardness of soundstage or more aggressive overall presentation of the Ref 6 until I did the direct comparison.

Ken
 
joeinid said:
Under certain conditions, the previous gear had some great qualities. Sure I was a little over the top and that was certainly my fault but at the time those posts were written, that’s how I felt. I guess I get excited and and wanted to post about it. It won’t happen again. I’ll be more reserved until the dust settles. Can you forgive me? It’s just my opinion of snapshots in time. I’m not a professional like you. I should know better.
Click to expand...

What nonsense! Joe please ... you don't have to change a thing.
You don't have to apologize for your opinions.

As you say it over there - Just own it!


Regards.
 
I can't say I heard brightness out of the Ref 6, even on a unit with only 100 hours, in a several hour home demo. I believe ARC recommends 400 hours for break-in, which may describe some reaction to it.
 
joeinid said:
Took you long enough :) I think several were mentioned already.

I’ll add another and you will certainly disagree but I couldn’t stand the ARC Ref 6. I will say the ARC GSPre is wonderful and I would take that in a heartbeat over the Ref 6.
Click to expand...

For the record, Joe never said the Ref 6 was bright. He just said that he didn’t like it. Perhaps he will elaborate on exactly what he didn’t like about its sound. For me there was a stridency in the treble that called attention to itself. It was not brightness.

Ken
 
Yes, not bright but a little aggressive and not smooth essentially. I’m not sure how to exactly describe it. I’d personally take a BHK signature over the Ref 6 and save money.

I will say that I’ve extensively heard the GSPre from ARC and absolutely love it. I could easily live with that over the Ref 6.


I’m generally not a fan of the 6H30 tube preamps.
 
Last edited:
At 835 hours, I don’t find the REF6 anything but sweet. During break in, it went through some serious adjustments in Sonic Signature but now has really stabilized and sounds anything but strident to me. In the all Shunyata system, the REF6 is one of my favorite preamps - ever. Joe and I have talked about this one a lot. We have agreed to disagree. ❤️

My concern has been more on SS amps than any preamp.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike said:
At 835 hours, I don’t find the REF6 anything but sweet. During break in, it went through some serious adjustments in Sonic Signature but now has really stabilized and sounds anything but strident to me. In the all Shunyata system, the REF6 is one of my favorite preamps - ever. Joe and I have talked about this one a lot. We have agreed to disagree. ❤️

My concern has been more on SS amps than any preamp.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Of course I agree with your assessment Mike-no surprise there. I wonder how many of the people that claim the Ref 6 is strident, bright, or aggressive strictly listen to digital and the Ref 6 is just shining a light on the upstream components? How many are matching the Ref 6 to a SS amp? Are you running it balanced or unbalanced? How is your room treated? Does your room tend to sound bright? Do your speakers tend to sound bright? The list goes on and on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top