Reference 75

[DaveyF]

Micro, I'm not quite sure I get what you are saying. OTOH, you state that the D70 you used to own was inferior to your VT150's and then OTOH, you seem to be saying that you had a great time listening to the D70 You bring up a valid point, regarding the fact that I am utilizing completely different ancillary gear than what may have been typically used with the D70 in the day. This is true and it maybe that because of this, I am hearing the amp in a different 'light' than what was typically heard from it back then. All I can say is that all of my a'phile friends who have heard this amp in my system, and had the chance to AB it against many of the newer ARC amps including the VT100Mk3, prefer the D70MK2 hands down! A very interesting point to add,in the new Absolute Sound, Dick Olsher states that he has just acquired a D70Mk2 and I have a suspicious feeling that he did his for a VERY good reason.
I would suggest that IF you can get your hands on one again, you give it a listen on your current gear and then get back to me.

[tdh888]

There should be no comparison to the old D-70 MKII amp and the REF-75 Davey. The power supply in the D-70 is wimpy compared to ARC’s current standards. The quality of the parts used in the REF-75 I can imagine comparing a D-70 to a REF-75 would be like bringing a knife to a gun fight.[/QUOTE]


What if the D70 or the D79B will have the latest parts (Caps and resistors) upgrade to be done by ARC which the factory offers w/c Im sure it wont cost more than $3000 maybe this vintage amps wont sound wimpy compared to the Ref75. Maybe it could give the Ref75 a run for the money.

[DaveyF]

[/QUOTE]What if the D70 or the D79B will have the latest parts (Caps and resistors) upgrade to be done by ARC which the factory offers w/c Im sure it wont cost more than $3000 maybe this vintage amps wont sound wimpy compared to the Ref75. Maybe it could give the Ref75 a run for the money.[/QUOTE]

Somehow, I have a feeling 'wimpy' isn't the term for some of the vintage ARC amps. Up against the much more powerful VT100Mk3, the D70 mk2 not only held its own but was far more palpable in the midrange. I'm sure that IF I asked the D70mk2 to drive the Sasha's to high levels they wouldn't fare as well as the Ref 75, BUT on more reasonable loads and in smaller rooms (like the one I utilize) this difference isn't going to be such a factor and the D70's glorious midrange will be a VERY hard act to beat-- just IMHO. IF the Ref75 outdoes the D70Mk2 in the midrange, it would certainly be one for the ages...we shall see

[tdh888]

Somehow, I have a feeling 'wimpy' isn't the term for some of the vintage ARC amps. Up against the much more powerful VT100Mk3, the D70 mk2 not only held its own but was far more palpable in the midrange.

Maybe the reason for the vintage ARC amps palpable mids is because of their tube input stage. I can hear the difference of the mids in my amps using J fets vs the tube input stage, as well the difference between amps using 12ax7 and 6922 input stage.

[DaveyF]

Somehow, I have a feeling 'wimpy' isn't the term for some of the vintage ARC amps. Up against the much more powerful VT100Mk3, the D70 mk2 not only held its own but was far more palpable in the midrange.

Maybe the reason for the vintage ARC amps palpable mids is because of their tube input stage. I can hear the difference of the mids in my amps using J fets vs the tube input stage, as well the difference between amps using 12ax7 and 6922 input stage.

That would be my thinking as well.

[microstrip]

I have no experience with the VT100 mk3, I only report on those amplifiers I have owned.
Surely I had a great time with the D70, and this is not relevant in my comparisons.

My speakers at that time were the Quad ESL63 in a medium sized room, most probably they influenced my opinions.

What preamplifier are you using with the D70? The best I heard of it was using an SP10.

[DaveyF]

Micro, I'm using a CAT SL1 Sig with Mullards. This and the fact that I am also using Nordost cabling from the ARC could be wherein the difference lies. The SP10 was a good preamp, BUT IMHO not in the league of the CAT.

[djanggo]

Uprgaded SP11mkII to CAT SL1 Signature ages ago (NOS Mullards, Telefunkens, Golden Dragon tried most). Later to a VTL 7.5mkII, then the ARC Ref3 then Anniv. Those pre's of yore were excellent during their days ('80-'90s), but 'given everything equal', are simply not in the league with current frontrunners--even compared to a Ref3. Likewise their amps, I've owned D115mkII, Classic150, M300 to Ref600mkIII amongst others in their time.. Imo, even the Ref150, within its power limitation, blows them away.

[mep]

The D-70 does not have anywhere near the bass quality or quantity that the newer ARC amps have and that's just for starters. If you listen on mini-monitors, it doesn't matter except I would expect the midbass to much better on the newer ARC amps as well and you would hear that improvement on mini-monitors. Before you proclaim the D-70 as some type of world-beater and better than ARC's latest offerings, you really need to hear some of the new amps in your house on your system. Until then, it's all speculation on your part. Some of us have owned the D-70 and newer ARC amps and know what the truth is.

And Davey, what version of the CAT SL1 Signature are you using? Do you have the version that has a pair of 12AU7s in it or do you have the newer version with 6922s? And even the newer version that got rid of the 12AU7s is how many generations past where CAT preamps are now? Do you think CAT preamps haven't gotten any better over the years and Ken Stevens is stuck in a rut?

[KeithR]

My issue with ARC is not the bass---but the midrange. The VT100mkIII sounded like an SS amp. It was flat, whitish sound, although perhaps that is partly because of the 6550s.

Will see if the newer Refs are more organic.