|
Audio Research State of the Art Audio Reproduction |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
||||
|
||||
A.R. Reference 75 vs. Mc MC275VI?
Well, the AR Ref. 75 is almost double the price. Has anyone compared the two side by side? The AR looks gorgeous, but the MC275 is a proven beast.
Which would you put in YOUR living room?
__________________
McIntosh Labs |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The ARC, if only because the Mc is an odd layout. I would like to have an ARC stack in my main 2 channel system. Maybe someday...
Last edited by stollen; 08-31-2014 at 08:49 PM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The ref75 really is a giant killer. It's an amazing amp for the price. While it may seem expensive, it's actually a "bargain"
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
I noticed in your signature you have a 75! NICE. I assume you have been happy with it? Has it been low maintenance? Your impressions please! Thx
__________________
McIntosh Labs |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The MC275 for sure. There is no way the AR sounds twice as go as the Mac. I would probably buy two MC275's over one Reference 75.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I have never heard the mc275, so I can't offer a comparison, but the ref75 is simply incredible. It sounds far bigger than its rating suggests. It has the smoothest mids I've ever heard. Paired with the Ref 5, it's a match made in heaven. It drives Sasha's with ease.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Marc, how many hs can be work "stable" ref 75 with same tubes ?
im thinking about this change in future. But really i play music min 2-3 hs per day (between stereo music and many films) and my other problem is "tone control" in my pre. I need in my small room descend -4-5 bass. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The ARC house sound and the Mac house sound are so completely different that it is really not a matter of one ARC Ref 75 vs 2 Mac 275s. A single Ref 75 and a single Mac 275 are robust enough to drive many speakers as much as need be. Those that need gobs of watts (or current) will need Mc 2301s or ARC Ref 250s.
As to the differences in sound, you should listen to both on the same system. Mac is a lit from within pleasant, burnished, rounded sound while ARC is more transparent with a midrange bloom. Mac does not cast tremendous width and depth in the soundfield as ARC does. Some feel that ARC is too bloomy. But I find it to be a great attribute. My personal preference is ARC. But 12 years ago before the latest 2 generations of Ref series from ARC , I preferred Mac. Rest assured, they sound very different.
__________________
Wilson Alexia V, ARC Ref 160M MkII,Ref 40,Ref Phono2SE, Shunyata Triton3, Typhon, Sigma PCs, ICs & SCs, Spectral SDR4000SV (w MIT IC), Belcanto PL1, Oppo 205, Marantz 2270 (tuner only):AudioDesk and VPI record cleaners, Furutech Demag & Destat; Stillpoint Apertures, TechDas AF 3S Premium with SAT CF9 and Kuzma 4pt 9" arms, Lyra Atlas Lambda SL, Dynavector XV1-t stereo and XV1-s mono carts, Miyajima mono, Shure V15VxMR, |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|
Audio Aficionado Sponsors | |