A Blog on the new ARC Reference Anniversary Preamplifier from The Audio Beat

[cmalak]

For those interested in a SOTA pre-amp, here's the first commentary (not yet an official review) on ARC's Reference Anniversary Preamp. This is a two chassis affair and runs $25K. ARC will be producing it for a period of one year. It looks like a beauty. If I had the coin, this would be at the top of my list. As it stands, I am waiting patiently until I can upgrade to the already very well received ARC Ref 5 preamp. For those interested, here is the blog entry at The Audio Beat: The Audio Beat - Casual Revelations: Audio Research's Reference Anniversary Preamplifier; Audio Research Reference Anniversary Preamp (http://www.theaudiobeat.com/blog/arc_reference_anniversary.htm)

For more info/specs from ARC, here is the link: Audio Research - Anniversary Edition Reference Preamplifier (http://www.audioresearch.com/flash/)

http://www.audioresearch.com/images/anniversary_1.jpg

[jdandy]

Cyril.......The Audio Research 40th Anniversary Reference Preamp looks amazing. This will become the new ARC benchmark preamp. It is a beauty.

[cmalak]

Dan...I agree. I found the comment that it is selling at 3x the forecast/projections of the company at this point (a few months from the launch date) interesting. Ofcourse the projections could have been very conservative to start out with but it's just interesting that a $25K preamp is outselling the company's expectations in this economy.

[AeroSmith]

Yep. :yes:

My dealer said they were expecting to get orders for 100 of these beauties. They currently have orders for over 250.

[two dot]

250 $25K preamps sold in a small town in Florida??? WOW.

Oh, sorry, i just reread that . You meant ARC has orders for 250... not your dealer....

[AeroSmith]

250 $25K preamps sold in a small town in Florida??? WOW.

Oh, sorry, i just reread that . You meant ARC has orders for 250... not your dealer....

LOL. I doubt even one comes to St. Pete. Too hot here to have so many tubes!

BTW, my dealer and friend of 16 years is in the city I lived in prior to St. Pete.

[PHC1]

Has anyone had a chance to see and hear the 40th preamp yet?

[cmalak]

nope...my local ARC dealer has taken orders for it but will not order it for a floor demo...

[Jean-Marc jmajma]

Has anyone had a chance to see and hear the 40th preamp yet?

Yes, 2 days ago Pete McGrath demoed WA Sophia 3 with this preamp and DAC8, Ref 110.

I was really impressed with this setup,we spent a long time with Pete on different kinds of (his) musics, this preamp is a killer...

[cmalak]

Jean-Marc...were the Ref 110s able to easily drive the Sophia 3s? I am sure Peter McGrath played some music showcasing large scale dynamics. Was wondering if the Ref 110 was able to deliver on that front. Also the DAC8 is supposed to be quite good. Any thoughts? How would you describe the overall sound of that combination? Thx

[darkstar]

Jonathan Valin (TAS) shared his initial thoughts on his blog today:

Posted by: Jonathan Valin at 2:02 am, September 17th, 2010

Some of you may have wondered why my TAS review of the ARC Reference 5 preamp was relatively succinct. There were two reasons actually. First, I knew that the Anniversary Edition Reference preamp was waiting in the wings, and since I expected it to be special, I wanted to leave room for it, critically speaking. Second—and more importantly—as good as I think the Reference 5 is (and it is my reference preamp), I didn’t think it was as big an advance over ARC’s Reference 3 preamp as, say, the Reference 3 was over the Reference 2. Although better in every way than the Reference 3, the Ref 5 was not fundamentally different-sounding than the Ref 3; it was more like a “hot-rodded” version of it.

The Anniversary Edition Reference preamp is fundamentally different-sounding—not just than the Reference 3 or 5 but than any preamp, tube or solid-state, I’ve heard. The Anniversary Edition Preamp is also more realistic than any preamp I’ve yet heard (save for one other that I will come to anon). Of course, at $25,000 the ARC Anniversary Edition Reference (hereafter the Ref 40, since the anniversary it commemorates is ARC’s fortieth) ought to be better than ARC’s previous efforts, but this much better? Frankly, I didn’t expect it; I doubt if anybody could have; differences this big and basic don’t come along everyday.

It’s pretty easy to describe what the Ref 40 does that sets it off from the long long line of its distinguished forbears (right back to the SP3), and you won’t need “golden ears” to hear it for yourself.

First, this is the most holographic preamp I have (and, I am willing to bet, you have) ever listened to. Although ARC has long held a patent on dimensionality and bloom—and dimensionality was one of the two areas in which the Reference 5 was markedly improved over the Reference 3—folks, you ain’t heard nothing yet.

What the Ref 40 does that no other preamp does is reproduce instruments and vocalists with a three-dimensional “solidity” (the very meaning of the word “stereo,” BTW) that is simply mind-boggling (and unparalleled in my experience). Instruments are so rooted in space, so solidly “there,” and the stage is so clear and orderly, it is almost like having a third center-channel speaker in the room. The difference is that dramatic.

A plethora of improvements have gone into making these far more solid and lifelike images. First there is a sheer density of tone color such as I’ve never before heard from any ARC preamp, which, in the past, have tended toward a lighter presentation of timbre, usually caused by a slight characteristic recessiveness in the upper bass and lower midrange and a slight characteristic rise in the upper mids (though both recessiveness and rise have been reduced to minims in recent ARC units). Not the Ref 40, whose sheer weight and fullness of tone color bespeak unusually realistic upper bass, lower midrange, and treble response and are a large part of what makes those instrumental and vocal images so shockingly solid and holographic.

Usually, you have to give up some transient speed and transparency to achieve this kind of density of timbre. Not with the Ref 40. In fact, I’ve never heard a tube preamp and only two or three solid-state preamps that have the transient speed of this one. Plucked sting instruments, such as the kotos and violins in Christopher Campbell’s Sound the All-Clear, have the taut string-against-wood report of the real thing in a real space. Ditto for sharply struck drums and cymbals. What’s amazing is that these instruments don't just have lifelike attack; they also have the body and sustain of the real things. The Ref 40 does not trade off timbre and duration for speed, or vice versa.

And then there is the Ref 40’s dynamic range. It is literally shocking (and goosebump-inducing) to hear how realistically this preamp reproduces powerful instruments, like the big brass choir on the right hand side of the stage in the third movement of Janacek’s Sinfonietta [Denon]. Outside of a concert hall, I don’t think I’ve heard a mere stereo system reproduce brass with such lifelike authority. Ditto for solo piano. On good recordings—such as Orion LP of Ingolf Dahl’s muscular sonatas—the Ref 40 makes a concert grand more "there" than any other preamp I’ve had in my system. As with timbre, there is a solidity to the Ref 40’s presentation of dynamics—a continuousness, if you will—that makes other preamps sound like they’re peaking or losing steam or breaking up at various points along the dynamic continuum.

Don’t even ask about soundstaging. When individual instrument are this “rooted” in place—this solid and realistic in color and dynamic—it becomes a lot easier to visualize them on stage, even when they are parts of large choirs.

As for retrieval of low-level detail, the Ref 40 is clearly superior to the Reference 5, which was the most detailed ARC preamp I’d heard. Whether it will equal that champeen of low-level resolution, the Technical Brain TBC, remains to be seen (or heard). Frankly, until the Ref 40, I’d never auditioned another preamp that could reproduce whole sets of data I hadn’t heard before from familiar discs with the regularity of the Technical Brain TBC. But when it comes to holographic imaging and realistic timbre and dynamic authority and lifelike solidity, the Ref 40 clearly does the same thing. It is genuinely thrilling to listen to a piece of gear that makes instruments and vocalists on familiar records sound consistently and unmistakably more like real instruments and real singers. In fact, I didn't think there is a bigger thrill in audio.

I will have more to say about Ref 40 and its chief rivals as time passes. What makes this sort of scary is that the 40 isn’t even fully broken in yet—and it’s already this good!

[cmalak]

Thx darkstar :thumbsup:...i will meander over to JV's blog on AVGuide.com to follow the back and forth and there usually is on his blogs :D

[darkstar]

My pleasure.

Kind of exciting regarding his initial impressions, considering his past reviews on the MBL 6010 and Soulution 720. That's damn fine company:thumbsup:

[cmalak]

Agreed. As you can tell from my signature line, I am a big ARC fan and I think the Ref 3 when mated to the Ref 110 is phenomenal. I can't imagine what the ARC 40 Annoversary pre sounds like! It must be pretty revelatory.

[darkstar]

Glad to hear the REF 110's can make the Thiels sing. I have 3.6 and they require some beef to get them going.

[cmalak]

Darkstar...the 2.4s are not an easy load for sure but I have been driving the 2.4s to satisfying levels with the REF 110 in a moderately sized room. I am sure if I mated them with a SS bruiser, I would get a tighter grip on the bass bins with better articulation, and probably a greater sense of dynamic ease, but I would lose the 3-dimensionality and bloom, and natural timbres I get with tubes. I am considering auditioning ARC's new DS450 power amp with the Thiels while maintaining the REF 3 in the chain, and am hoping that I don't lose much of what I like with the REF 110s, while adding better bass control and a greater sense of ease and dynamic contrasts.

[Jean-Marc jmajma]

Jean-Marc...were the Ref 110s able to easily drive the Sophia 3s? I am sure Peter McGrath played some music showcasing large scale dynamics. Was wondering if the Ref 110 was able to deliver on that front. Also the DAC8 is supposed to be quite good. Any thoughts? How would you describe the overall sound of that combination? Thx

Yes, Cyril , the Sophia 3s were easily driven ... I was very surprised.

You're right when you say that Pete's demo tracks are very special, with very high dynamic and a very very impressive sound...nevertheless, one of the guys had brought CDs (I remember one of Buddy Guy especially) and it was wonderful.

The overall sound: I would say very very true and natural, with high dynamics when needed, magnificent voices, and no harsh at all, very easy. I had the impression there was no more speaker in the room, they disappeared and I had the feeling to assist to a live performance, with for example Buddy Guy in the room .

I don't know that much the Ref 5 to be able to compare, I'm a McIntosh guy, but Iwas very impressed.