Preview of ARC's Ref 250 monoblocks from The Audio Beat...
 

The Audio Beat - First Sounds: Listening to the Reference 250s; Audio Research Reference 250 mono amplifiers

http://www.theaudiobeat.com/blog/pic...ence_250_2.jpg

http://www.theaudiobeat.com/blog/pic...ence_250_1.jpg

Impressive review Cyril, Thanks !
I could change my 2301's for those :D !
But I would loose 50 W per channel and a few bills :D

Jerome...you are clearly going to be an ARC preamp/McIntosh amp kind of guy :D But if your dealer gets the Ref 250s in, what will it hurt to go give them a listen? :thought: :D

By the way, the SF Strads being driven by the MC2301s at Ivan's, c'etait super :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Yes Cyril, I will ask him about the Ref 250.
You seem pretty sure that I will get the Ref 5 right ? :D

Jerome...I am not sure at all. I think the C1000P is a wonderful amp. I think you are thinking that if the Ref Phono 2 sounded good to you, that you are likely to have a similar impression about the Ref 5. My only advice is to listen to it in your own system and compare it with your C1000P. You may find you still prefer the C1000P. I think with all things high end audio, better to first try for yourself preferably in your system before you write the check or hand over the credit card. There are too many variables that could make one component sound good in one system and nothing special in another. :thumbsup:

It will be interesting what you will think of the REF 5. :yes: I wouldn't want to guess based on your positive experience with the REF2 phono as I have never heard it but I did own a C500P and have had the REF5 in my system recently along with the 210s. The C500P and REF5 are not cut from the same sonic cloth by any stretch of imagination. :D The REF5 is a lot more holographic, transparent and voiced differently. The C500P tonally was a bit denser but the REF5 had a more vivid palette of tonal color and saturation and also exhibited more dynamic "contrast". It also painted more three dimensional and palpable images. Of course I have to compare with the amps in mind as well. REF5 was in combination with the REF 210s and the C500P with McIntosh 501s.

Your mix of REF5 and 2301s will be interesting. Since I also owned the 2301s which sounded pretty darn neutral to my ears, I am curious how you will find the synergy between the REF5 and 2301s especially in combination with your PMC speakers which also tend to be mostly neutral with a bit of forwardness in the mids. :scratch2:

Looking forward to your findings. :yes:

Very Good Post Cyril !

Serge,
From what you say and what the Ref 2 brought to my system, I'm quite positive that I will prefer the sound of the Ref 5 over the C1000P. But experience will tell.
About the light forwardness in the mids of the PMC, I'm not sure wether most PMC owners would agree here. It is true that the mids of the PMC have something magical, but I personally would not qualify them as "forward".

Perceived synergy and taste varies from listener to listener, we all know that. You may find the REF5 the golden ticket in your system, you may prefer the balance of C1000 with the rest of your system. That the 2301s are McIntosh masterpiece, (IMHO), (I have not heard the newer 601s) in absolute terms of transparency, neutrality, resolution and plenty of air and three dimensionality is not a question as far as my ears go. They are very, very impressive 300w tube monoblocks. The ARC REF 210s were no slouch either, I would have a hard time deciding between the 210s and the 2301s honestly. The choice between the C1000 and REF5 may very well be a much easier one for you but it depends on what you perceive the synergy to be and your own taste.

About the PMC midrange, I am not a huge expert, have only heard them once. If you don't agree with mid forwardness, perhaps it was my experience only.

The Ref 250 look good. I can imagine they would look even better in black. I wonder if the sound signature has been tweaked in these last few product releases?:scratch2: