[djcxxx]

I completed the transition to the latest SE components with an ARC upgrade of my CD9 to CD9SE. I acquired the 6SE in May and the 3SE in July. The DAW’s have been in since February. Couple of minor QA negatives from ARC. The 160S meters started behaving erratically and to ARC’s credit a new “160B” was substituted with meters sourced from a new supplier. Of course I was willing to have my unit fixed with new meters but that may not be possible. The new meters do not illuminate symmetrically, but that’s not worth pursuing. I have doubts about the longevity of these meters and the new ARC management may as well. My Phono 3SE was delivered, out of the box, with one channel on input 1 inoperative despite a QC card stating otherwise. The CD9SE, unlike my Ref Phono 2SE upgrade, was delivered without a new QC card or manual. Small things to be sure, but unlike any ARC experience I’ve had over a 40 year history with ARC.
Sonically the Ref 6SE is quite a departure from my 5SE and synergies much better with the 160S. Soundstage is more detailed and less recessed, but somewhat less warm than 5SE/75SE combination. Another interpretation would be more accurate. I do not listen in ultralinear mode so no comment. The 3SE has not delivered a “eureka” moment over the 2SE. In fact I cannot distinguish the difference which may be a limitation of my vinyl rig. The CD9SE actually sounds marginally better than the CD9, better imaging, clarity. Possibly new tubes are the answer to that. As an aside, the Wilson’s are truly superb in all parameters except the lowest registers of bass. They are the stars in my system. At this point I would have to say that while ARC gear remains a good value (compared to next price level gear), I have some concerns regarding the QC and longevity of current models. New management and time will tell.