Audio Research Ref3 SE Phono comparisons

[BillK]

My sense was that ARC wanted a bit more excitement in their sound -- something to distinquish the 3 from the 2SE. The 3 had a slightly fuller, weightier sound with a sense of pushing the music at me, its sound was more forward, slightly less relaxed, slightly less natural. Slightly more depth and layering - which is what you reported. A bit more harmonic information in the mid-bass. This is not so much about instrument positioning, but overall character. It was bolder, more masculine, more extroverted than the 2SE.

Since I am currently demoing a 3 SE and own a 2 SE, it's interesting that I don't hear that at all.

Through extended listening I actually don't find the 3 SE forward at all, rather it seems to be more revealing of what is behind the plane of the speakers.

I'd say the 2 SE is actually a little muddy by comparison - not bad, but as I referenced in a previous post, the harmonica at the beginning of New Frontier was just kind of over on the right hand side through the 2 SE where it's delineated clearly in space behind the plane of the right speaker through the 3 SE.

I didn't mean to but I realize I just spent four hours listening to the 3 SE putting on album after album - I just couldn't stop. I'd actually call the 3 SE more musical and the 2 SE less resolving, perhaps more "tubby" in character, yet the 3 SE retains the warmth and soundstage of tubes. That makes the 3 SE seem more musical than the 2 SE to me, with the 3 SE seeming more natural and the 2 SE being a bit more "honey colored" if you will, giving a little bloom where none exists on the recording.

I've got the 3 SE for a few more days, so I'll report back if I feel any differently when I swap back to the 2 SE.

Thanks for the explanation!

 

[retired farmer]

What do you fellows think of the reference 1?

 

[BillK]

What do you fellows think of the reference 1?

At least I never heard it.

I moved straight from a PH5 to the Ref 2 SE.

 

[retired farmer]

At least I never heard it.

I moved straight from a PH5 to the Ref 2 SE.

Ok

 

[tima]

Since I am currently demoing a 3 SE and own a 2 SE, it's interesting that I don't hear that at all

Why don't you tell us the rest of your system -- everything is in a context.

 

[BillK]

Why don't you tell us the rest of your system -- everything is in a context.

Turntable: Acoustic Signature Montana NEO
Tonearm: Acoustic Signature TA-7000 NEO
Cartridge: Lyra Atlas
Phono Cable: Synergistic Research SRX Phono

Preamp: Ayre KX-R Twenty
Amps: 2 x Ayre MX-R Twenty
Speakers: Alsyvox Botticelli X

 

[tima]

Turntable: Acoustic Signature Montana NEO
Tonearm: Acoustic Signature TA-7000 NEO
Cartridge: Lyra Atlas
Phono Cable: Synergistic Research SRX Phono

Preamp: Ayre KX-R Twenty
Amps: 2 x Ayre MX-R Twenty
Speakers: Alsyvox Botticelli X

Thanks. Looks like a nice system. I'm not saying the 2Se is better than the 3Se, just describing what I heard from the 3 (non SE.) The MX-R Twenty is probably a bit more panoramic than my Lamm M1.2 which offer a greater sense of presence, whereas the Ayre amps may yield more precise imaging details.

 

[BillK]

I did some more extended listening and in my system the Ref 3 SE is a definite step up - a much richer and deeper soundstage with more precise placement - instruments at the plane of the speaker in the Ref 2 SE have defined places in depth on the 3 SE.

You may be right, it may be the combo with the MX-R Twenties; with another amp the presentation might be completely different.

My dealer offered me a nice trade of my 2 SE for their demo 3 SE, and if the numbers work I am definitely making the swap.

 

[Pacha]

What do you fellows think of the reference 1?

I had the Ref 1 Phono in my system for many years. Last year I replaced it with the Ref 2se Phono. The 2 is quieter, quicker and fuller in my system. It is a bit more forward but, you can tell they are both ARC in the way they work with ARC line stages and power amps. Again, in my system, the Ref 1 was a little darker and laid back. I really liked my Ref 1 Phono and it stayed in my system for almost a decade.

 

[BillK]

To wrap up my story, I did get a killer deal so I was actually able to trade in my Ref 2 SE Phono for a brand new Ref 3 SE Phono.

I've put eight hours on the tubes so far.

 

[Another Johnson]

I ended up selling my CJ TEA1 and TEA2MAX. I do think they are really exceptionally good. But after I’d picked up a REF Phono 3, I couldn’t justify keeping them. The REF Phono 3 is more than exceptionally good. I may upgrade to the 3SE, but I am pretty happy with the 3.

 

[JRW1971]

I may have preferred my REF 3 to the 3SE. I suppose one could say that removing that subtle lower midrange / upper bass bump improved the accuracy of the presentation, but I think maybe I liked it better before they removed that.

 

[BillK]

It's all personal taste; I found the 3 SE to be a huge leap forward from the 3 (and 2 SE).

 

[Odd Harry]

Is there anyone. who have experience using Van den Hul Colibri in combinations with 3 SE

 

[tima]

Is there anyone. who have experience using Van den Hul Colibri in combinations with 3 SE

I used a vdH Colibri Master Signature with an ARC Ref Phono 10 .

The combination worked well, imo. The RP10 offers an open airy soundstage that supports excellent imaging and pitch differentiation. Those characteristics are a forte of the MasterSig which yields excellent top-end extension. Fine performance details in the upper-mids and treble came through quite well. The RP10 never let the MasterSig get too peaky though the faintly silvery character of the ARC phono came through. Transients occasionally could have a wee bit of an edge yet not to the point of distraction. Mid to low bass was quick with v. nice resolution although there I would prefer a bit more weight and density.

 

[Odd Harry]

I used a vdH Colibri Master Signature with an ARC Ref Phono 10 .

The combination worked well, imo. The RP10 offers an open airy soundstage that supports excellent imaging and pitch differentiation. Those characteristics are a forte of the MasterSig which yields excellent top-end extension. Fine performance details in the upper-mids and treble came through quite well. The RP10 never let the MasterSig get too peaky though the faintly silvery character of the ARC phono came through. Transients occasionally could have a wee bit of an edge yet not to the point of distraction. Mid to low bass was quick with v. nice resolution although there I would prefer a bit more weight and density.

Hi Thank you for your reply , i have a Colibri Grand Cru that have 0.75 mv output that i will send to Van den Hul for adjustment.to 0.35 mv output and i am looking for one extra phono stage. ARC reference 3 SE is one of the phono stage i am looking at.

Best Regards OHS

 

[tima]

Hi Thank you for your reply , i have a Colibri Grand Cru that have 0.75 mv output that i will send to Van den Hul for adjustment.to 0.35 mv output and i am looking for one extra phono stage. ARC reference 3 SE is one of the phono stage i am looking at.

Best Regards OHS

Cool. What other phono stages are you considering?

 

[Odd Harry]

Cool. What other phono stages are you considering?

i was considering D’Agostino Momentum Phono but the price is very high , so then i was considering Burmester 100 / Brinkmann Edision MK II
and then ARC reference 3 SE and keep my Avid Pulsare II

OHS

 

[Nemal1]

Esoteric e-02 is an excellent alternative, plus has balanced inputs as well as SE if that is necessary for you.

 

[Odd Harry]

Esoteric e-02 is an excellent alternative, plus has balanced inputs as well as SE if that is necessary for you.

Hi Yes i had a look at Esoteric e-02 look's great