AudioAficionado.org

AudioAficionado.org (https://www.audioaficionado.org/index.php)
-   Audio Research (https://www.audioaficionado.org/forumdisplay.php?f=91)
-   -   ARC/DAW system impressions (https://www.audioaficionado.org/showthread.php?t=48786)

djcxxx 10-05-2020 02:39 PM

ARC/DAW system impressions
 
2 Attachment(s)
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.

2fastdriving 10-05-2020 11:45 PM

Looking great! Congrats on some fantastic gear. I know how good ARC and Wilson pair. Let's see a pic of the whole system!

Ps. Make sure you are using the 8 ohm tap...

And like you, I'll be watching to see what changes are in store for the company.

lem321 10-06-2020 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djcxxx (Post 1016573)
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.

Thanks for relating your recent experiences with ARC and your SE updates. I have almost the same equipment having recently completed a factory upgrade of the Ref 6 and Phono 3 to SE status. I also have the ARC CD9, 250SE and Wilson Sashas. I only recently found out about the availability of the SE upgrade for the CD9 and didn't think it would improve the CD playback until I read your comments...new tubes maybe? I'm considering it just for the cool looks and the added flexibility if I ever start streaming.

Some of your experiences with ARC QC sounds unusual although I've also heard about problems with their "ghost" meters. I've generally been very pleased with ARC's QC and service, although the few times there've been hiccups, they always make it right. Your impressions of the new SE components are spot on with my own. The 6SE is much better than the 5SE in the way you describe but the phono stage, not so much.

A question: your rack is very neat but it looks like there is fairly minimal space around the components especially the Ref 6SE. Aren't you concerned about ventilation?

Again, thanks for sharing.

joey_v 10-06-2020 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lem321 (Post 1016689)
A question: your rack is very neat but it looks like there is fairly minimal space around the components especially the Ref 6SE. Aren't you concerned about ventilation?

Again, thanks for sharing.

You're right, after pointing that out, I looked at the photos again and noted that it does appear to be pretty tight/snug. Ventilation might be an issue.

What kind of rack is that?

lem321 10-07-2020 10:54 AM

Zoethecus?

djcxxx 10-08-2020 10:03 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Yes it is a Zoethecus with “Z slabs” I purchased new from them in 02 or 03. Sadly they went under but I’ve yet to find a stand as good that wasn’t stratospheric in price. It is a little tight up front but there is a couple of inches above and below the 6SE and 3SE. Here is a photo of the entire set up.

2fastdriving 10-08-2020 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djcxxx (Post 1016786)
Yes it is a Zoethecus with “Z slabs” I purchased new from them in 02 or 03. Sadly they went under but I’ve yet to find a stand as good that wasn’t stratospheric in price. It is a little tight up front but there is a couple of inches above and below the 6SE and 3SE. Here is a photo of the entire set up.

Thanks for showing the whole rig. Very nice! Congrats on a well thought out system.:banana:

lem321 10-09-2020 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djcxxx (Post 1016786)
Yes it is a Zoethecus with “Z slabs” I purchased new from them in 02 or 03. Sadly they went under but I’ve yet to find a stand as good that wasn’t stratospheric in price. It is a little tight up front but there is a couple of inches above and below the 6SE and 3SE. Here is a photo of the entire set up.

Very neat and tidy system. Awesome. Thanks for sharing your experiences and pictures.

jpspock 10-11-2020 05:06 PM

Great setup and thx for sharing. DAW is an exceptional speaker. I am just surprised about your comment for low frequencies. Normally, it’ si very deep, detailed and fast, so for sure you need to search where you can improve your system because the problem doesn’t come from thé DAW ..

djcxxx 10-12-2020 09:32 AM

The DAW does not extend as low in the bass as the Alexia 2 which I auditioned as well, and the difference is easily appreciated. The bass of my DAW is limited by positioning needs.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:25 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©Copyright 2009-2023 AudioAficionado.org.Privately owned, All Rights Reserved.