A.R. Reference 75 vs. Mc MC275VI?

[Priaptor]

Supposedly the KT120s are good for 2000 hours and the KT150s are good for 4000 hours.

I personally have not heard the mc275 which is supposed to be a wonderful amp. I have had the pleasure of owning the MC2301s which were wonderful which I replaced with ARC REF250s. I ultimately changed out the REF250s with a REF75 which I have "upgraded" with KT150s. Given my speakers being the Nola Concert Grands, the REF75/KT150s are the best I have ever heard my system. The REF75 is really amazing. What speakers are you driving? The REF75 has never run out of power on my Concert Grands, which admittedly are pretty efficient, however they have huge subs built into the speaker and the lower octaves especially with the KT150s are extremely well defined.

I highly recommend the REF75 although you can't go wrong with either. I do really like the look of the 275 and people I respect who sell both like it too. You really need to audition both

[mati1979]

very Good thread.

only Tung S. make kt150 ?


how can work ref 75 with pre c2300 ?
ref 5 SE is very expensive pre and without tone control.
Any know if AR 75 can be converted to 220V ? (from 110)

[C2300MC275]

Definitely take the Audio Research 75. Have owned the Mac275mkV and it is nowhere near the Audio Research IMHO. The 275 sounds syrupy and blurred by comparison - can't think of a single aspect of the Mac performance that is preferable.

[Toobs]

If I would have had the $$$$$ I would have bought the ARC ref75. I didn't, so I bought the MC275VI. The 275 is one hell of an amp. I'm quite happy

[2fastdriving]

Originally Posted by C2300MC275

Definitely take the Audio Research 75. Have owned the Mac275mkV and it is nowhere near the Audio Research IMHO. The 275 sounds syrupy and blurred by comparison - can't think of a single aspect of the Mac performance that is preferable.

Uh-oh...better ask Ivan if you can change your handle

[mati1979]

and in compares with SS quad b. ?

mc275 yes, for me are all adjectives :blurred , syrupy ,rounded

but in compares with SS Quad Balance new models mc ? for example mc601
this is more detail and quick than mc275 but, in compares with ref 75 ?

[2fastdriving]

Originally Posted by mati1979

and in compares with SS quad b. ?

mc275 yes, for me are all adjectives :blurred , syrupy ,rounded

but in compares with SS Quad Balance new models mc ? for example mc601
this is more detail and quick than mc275 but, in compares with ref 75 ?

I can answer this. I had a c2300/MC452 combo before I switched to my Ref5/Ref75 combo. I can tell you that the ARC combo has more detail, depth, smoother midrange, and more textured bass. I don't think the bass is QUITE as quick, but I don't feel it is lacking. It's pretty tight, and it does have better definition (texture). I was shocked to realize the Ref75 can beat the MC452 in most areas of competency, and yet it still maintains its obvious advantage: smooth as silk vocals.

In my opinion of course

[jimimac]

The Macs Are better.I'll take McIntosh all around!!!

[dizzie]

Originally Posted by Priaptor

Supposedly the KT120s are good for 2000 hours and the KT150s are good for 4000 hours.

Priaptor, Where did you get your information on longevity? Not a challenge. I read about the 2000 hours for the KT120s before but nothing about the KT150s. And nothing official. Just urban legend.

[Priaptor]

Originally Posted by dizzie

Priaptor, Where did you get your information on longevity? Not a challenge. I read about the 2000 hours for the KT120s before but nothing about the KT150s. And nothing official. Just urban legend.

I understand.

These tubes were tested on Ref 250s and they got 4000 hours last I heard. Someone who got the info direct from the horse's mouth