from McIntosh to ARC

[MisterBritt]

Originally Posted by audioguy3107

One thing to keep in mind is the gain of your cartridge of course......the ARC Ref 2's high gain setting is significantly higher/louder than the Manley.....I always thought the Manleys high gain was a little light for my Dynavector. The ARC's high gain setting is just right for my XX2 mk II. Of course if you have a higher gain cartridge you may be able to get away with the lower gain settings, but the low gain is pretty low for many MC cartridges.
- Buck

I currently employ an A23 SUT for my Ortofon SPU-A cartridge. That particular SUT is designed and dedicated specifically for this family of cartridges. They go hand in glove. I'm not sure if I would favor continuing to use it, running through the MM (not MC) section of an AR phone section, or simply go without it. Only one way to tell. Ha. But my knee-jerk response, albeit without having tried any of this, would be to not use the SUT and simply rely on the AR phono section to boost the low signal from this cartridge. I'd like to keep things as simple as possible.

[JBT]

Originally Posted by Dsholl1

Hi everyone.

Just curious if anyone moved from Mac to ARC especially regarding preamps?

Having heard the new ARC Ref 6 preamp compared to the C2500, I have to say, I am blown away.

Any members experiences would be greatly appreciated.

Well you're comparing a mid range Mac preamp with Audio Research top of the line reference. This is a no brainer.

I have two Mcintosh systems and two Audio Research systems at my lake house. I really love the sound of Mac and ARC. . Mcintosh systems have a tubier sound. ARC cleaner sound. Less bloom than Macs. Depends on your taste. Some like the cleaner sound of ARC and some like the bloom of the Macs.

Compare a reference ARC preamp with one of Macs top of the line. c500, c1000, or the new c1100.

Both American made and both great companies!!

[Dsholl1]

Thanks everyone for your feedback. I am also using an ARC phono with my Mac gear(PH 8) and this is what has piqued my interest. I have no comparability issues with it at all. Has great synergy. Having recently auditioned the Ref 6 I am beginning to get the "bug". The Ref 6 had it all over the C2500 but also had some of that warmth / tube musicality that I love about Mac gear. I was never such a big ARC fan because I thought they could be a bit too neutral. But the new 6 has changed that for me.

[jpgr4blu]

Originally Posted by Dsholl1

Thanks everyone for your feedback. I am also using an ARC phono with my Mac gear(PH 8) and this is what has piqued my interest. I have no comparability issues with it at all. Has great synergy. Having recently auditioned the Ref 6 I am beginning to get the "bug". The Ref 6 had it all over the C2500 but also had some of that warmth / tube musicality that I love about Mac gear. I was never such a big ARC fan because I thought they could be a bit too neutral. But the new 6 has changed that for me.

I replaced my Mac gear with ARC gear piece by piece. There is no contest between these 2 companies (now both owned by WOM). If you replace your Mac amp with a similarly priced ARC amp, you will be know of what I speak. The blue meters are nice though.

[JBT]

Originally Posted by jpgr4blu

I replaced my Mac gear with ARC gear piece by piece. There is no contest between these 2 companies (now both owned by WOM). If you replace your Mac amp with a similarly priced ARC amp, you will be know of what I speak. The blue meters are nice though.

You might want to read this old thread

http://www.audioaficionado.org/mcint...00c-c500t.html

[jpgr4blu]

Originally Posted by JBT

You might want to read this old thread

http://www.audioaficionado.org/mcint...00c-c500t.html

Prior to purchasing my Mac C1000 to go with my MC2102, I auditioned the Ref 3 against the C1000 at my dealer with a pair of MC 501s. It was not even close. The C1000 sounded better with the Mac amp by a country mile and I purchased it. The ARC was bloated, blurry and lacked dynamics. I posted my findings on another site lauding the Mac C1000 as a preamp that bettered the Ref 3. Needless to say, that post received many comments for and against my conclusions.
A number of years later, being very happy with my all Mac setup, I went to the same dealer to hear the then new MC 2301s with my Mac preamp (which they also had) to see how much I would stand to gain over my Mc2102 with the extra power. I listened to that system with Totem speakers. It was during that audition and my expression of interest in purchasing the 2301s that the salesperson said, "before you buy the MC 2301s, you should hear an all ARC system that we have in the other room which I think you will like more than an upgraded Mac system." I explained that I thought I had a pretty good idea of what ARC products sound like as I had auditioned them previously. But he insisted, so into the other room I went. The sound was simply among the best I had ever heard and far superior to my home system and the Mac system I had just heard down the hall. It was ARCs midlevel amp and preamp with Totem speakers that were one level below the Totem speakers in the Mac room.
The system was more transparent by far, more expressive and more musical than the Mac system with all of the cds I brought with me, all of which I knew intimately mainly from listening to them for years on my Mac system. And the SQ was better at less than half the price of the top of the line Mac amp/preamp.
I proceeded to buy ARC Reference components one by one to the point where all of my Mac products were replaced by ARC products. I then purchased the next generation of Reference ARC products.
I learned one extremely important lesson which has stayed with me ever since. Component synergy is the most underrated aspect of building a system. Since that day, I have never purchased any significant audio component without hearing it in my system first. Another lesson learned that I have tested since----Mac amps and preamps work better together than Mac/ARC combinations and vice versa. Pairing Mac/ARC amps and preamps together in my experience yields the worst of both worlds.

[2fastdriving]

^^ agree ^^

[JBT]

Originally Posted by jpgr4blu

Prior to purchasing my Mac C1000 to go with my MC2102, I auditioned the Ref 3 against the C1000 at my dealer with a pair of MC 501s. It was not even close. The C1000 sounded better with the Mac amp by a country mile and I purchased it. The ARC was bloated, blurry and lacked dynamics. I posted my findings on another site lauding the Mac C1000 as a preamp that bettered the Ref 3. Needless to say, that post received many comments for and against my conclusions.
A number of years later, being very happy with my all Mac setup, I went to the same dealer to hear the then new MC 2301s with my Mac preamp (which they also had) to see how much I would stand to gain over my Mc2102 with the extra power. I listened to that system with Totem speakers. It was during that audition and my expression of interest in purchasing the 2301s that the salesperson said, "before you buy the MC 2301s, you should hear an all ARC system that we have in the other room which I think you will like more than an upgraded Mac system." I explained that I thought I had a pretty good idea of what ARC products sound like as I had auditioned them previously. But he insisted, so into the other room I went. The sound was simply among the best I had ever heard and far superior to my home system and the Mac system I had just heard down the hall. It was ARCs midlevel amp and preamp with Totem speakers that were one level below the Totem speakers in the Mac room.
The system was more transparent by far, more expressive and more musical than the Mac system with all of the cds I brought with me, all of which I knew intimately mainly from listening to them for years on my Mac system. And the SQ was better at less than half the price of the top of the line Mac amp/preamp.
I proceeded to buy ARC Reference components one by one to the point where all of my Mac products were replaced by ARC products. I then purchased the next generation of Reference ARC products.
I learned one extremely important lesson which has stayed with me ever since. Component synergy is the most underrated aspect of building a system. Since that day, I have never purchased any significant audio component without hearing it in my system first. Another lesson learned that I have tested since----Mac amps and preamps work better together than Mac/ARC combinations and vice versa. Pairing Mac/ARC amps and preamps together in my experience yields the worst of both worlds.

That's your opinion. I get to hear ARC systems and Mac Systems daily. I'll say it again. ARC has a cleaner sound. MAC has the more traditional tube sound. Even MAC solid state systems have more of a tube sound than ARC. I love my ARC gear. The CD9 is a masterpiece and has a great DAC. I plan on buying the new DAC9 when it comes out. But my Mac gear resides in the living room and game room. ARC my office and master bedroom.

No one has the same taste!! or ears!!

[jpgr4blu]

Originally Posted by JBT

That's your opinion. I get to hear ARC systems and Mac Systems daily. I'll say it again. ARC has a cleaner sound. MAC has the more traditional tube sound. Even MAC solid state systems have more of a tube sound than ARC. I love my ARC gear. The CD9 is a masterpiece and has a great DAC. I plan on buying the new DAC9 when it comes out. But my Mac gear resides in the living room and game room. ARC my office and master bedroom.

No one has the same taste!! or ears!!

Absolutely, that is just my opinion and has no more validity than anybody else's. Although I always found the Mac sound to be burnished and rounded---very pleasantly so. (I had a number of Mac systems before I went to the C1000 and 2102) The ARC sound is more transparent but, to my ears, has much greater bloom than Mac. Perhaps bloom is in the ears of the beholder.

[2fastdriving]

Originally Posted by jpgr4blu

Absolutely, that is just my opinion and has no more validity than anybody else's. Although I always found the Mac sound to be burnished and rounded---very pleasantly so. (I had a number of Mac systems before I went to the C1000 and 2102) The ARC sound is more transparent but, to my ears, has much greater bloom than Mac. Perhaps bloom is in the ears of the beholder.

I also feel that ARC has more "bloom".