Audio Research REF 75SE and REF 80S
- Thread starter ken6217
- Start date
The new ref 80 is a different design and a reduced output version of the ref 160 stereo amp.
Im unable to give you a description of the sound quality as I haven’t heard the new amp.
I would imagine there will be good deals on brand new existing stock Ref75 SE’s
Im unable to give you a description of the sound quality as I haven’t heard the new amp.
I would imagine there will be good deals on brand new existing stock Ref75 SE’s
I actually have the REF 75SE, I was wonder the difference in sound.
I know it is now switchable between pentode and triode mode. I do like the auto bias feature.
Of course, if there is not much difference in sound, then of course there is no reason to change amps.
I know it is now switchable between pentode and triode mode. I do like the auto bias feature.
Of course, if there is not much difference in sound, then of course there is no reason to change amps.
If the new amp uses the four layer circuit board from the Ref160 amps (and simpler circuit) I would expect it will be a step up/forward. But... I’ve not heard it. I do have 160m that I moved to from Ref75.
its a big jump in price, for sure. i'd love to hear the 80 as I really enjoyed my 75SE for several yeaars
It does have the same four layer circuit board. From what I read, it is basically the 160S but half the power.
AR is still selling the REF 75SE on their website as well. However I do see some dealers that have the REF 75SE selling for less than original retail.
AR is still selling the REF 75SE on their website as well. However I do see some dealers that have the REF 75SE selling for less than original retail.
I am moving "down" from a Ref 150SE to a Ref 80S. My new amp should be in soon but I will need some time for it to burn in (by all accounts a minimum of 400 hours). My pre is a Ref 6. My dealer who has sold ARC for many years tells me he preferred the 75SE to the 150SE but that the 80S, 160S and 160M are in an entirely different league. But we would expect him to say that. I am the original buyer/owner of both the Ref 6 and 150SE and what primarily prompted me to buy the 80S is that my main fuse on the right circuit board in my 150SE blew and caused some minor damage to the circuit board. I sent a photo of the damage to ARC's service dept and they told me it was very strange/unusual. But the kicker is this-ARC will not even send me an RMA to return my amp for repairs for 4-5 months as they are that backlogged doing repairs!
I have owned ARC amps for 20+ years and this new series is their first to fuse the output tubes rather than pair them with a resistor meant to blow and then be replaced when the output tube fails. That plus the autobias, the triode/pentode switch, the two minute auto delay when turning back on after recently shutting down (a major faux pas leading to catastrophic failure on the 150SE-you must remember to wait five minutes if shut down and then turn back on), and the sexy looks all lead me to this in addition to needing something to replace my 150SE while I wait for repairs.
I have owned ARC amps for 20+ years and this new series is their first to fuse the output tubes rather than pair them with a resistor meant to blow and then be replaced when the output tube fails. That plus the autobias, the triode/pentode switch, the two minute auto delay when turning back on after recently shutting down (a major faux pas leading to catastrophic failure on the 150SE-you must remember to wait five minutes if shut down and then turn back on), and the sexy looks all lead me to this in addition to needing something to replace my 150SE while I wait for repairs.
Attachments
-
Amp.jpg -
Listening room.jpg
A very interesting post. When I got my Ref 75SE, I was instructed to always wait 5 minutes before switching on again and that has become a habit on the odd occasion where I need to do that. FWIW, I messaged a well known ARC dealer on another forum, and he is of the view that in terms of sound quality, there's not much in it for the Ref 75SE vs Ref80S. I'll be interested to hear how you find the Ref 80S.
So your "well known dealer on another forum" has spoken. That settles that. And I love your choice of words, "there's not much in it". Not much in it for whom? In short, your post smacks of someone with a Ref 75 SE who wants to piss all over the prospect that there might be something better.
No, it was not meant that way at all. I have obviously caused offence and for that I apologise. I use this forum as a way of gaining knowledge and hunting for the most cost effective moves forward. My intention was to contribute, not to piss on anything. Apologies and good luck.
My fault.
I will report back but it will be based on comparison of the Ref 80S to the Ref 150SE as I have never had the pleasure of having the 75 SE in my system. By virtually all accounts the 75 SE sounds "better" than the 150 SE though the specifics as to how it sounds better has always been vague.
My gut tells me it is a matter of less often being more when it comes to amp design. And we all know that the choice of loudspeaker plays a huge role in how any given amp sounds. Given the vagaries of loudspeaker loading, all claims, observations, and subjective assessments have to be taken with a huge grain of salt, including mine. In my specific case, the Ref 150 SE was way more amp than I needed for my small listening room and Devore O/93's alternated at times with Spendor D7.2's. Be that as it may, I was always very impressed with the sound of the 150 SE. Until it failed.
I will report back but it will be based on comparison of the Ref 80S to the Ref 150SE as I have never had the pleasure of having the 75 SE in my system. By virtually all accounts the 75 SE sounds "better" than the 150 SE though the specifics as to how it sounds better has always been vague.
My gut tells me it is a matter of less often being more when it comes to amp design. And we all know that the choice of loudspeaker plays a huge role in how any given amp sounds. Given the vagaries of loudspeaker loading, all claims, observations, and subjective assessments have to be taken with a huge grain of salt, including mine. In my specific case, the Ref 150 SE was way more amp than I needed for my small listening room and Devore O/93's alternated at times with Spendor D7.2's. Be that as it may, I was always very impressed with the sound of the 150 SE. Until it failed.
I am astonished to learn that that only ARC can service their amplifiers in the US - our local distributor has an excellent technician that usually services any problem in about one week unless some unusual ARC part is needed - than three weeks is a typical service time. They keep stock of cathode and grid resistors and ARC circuits are simple and logical, as they say no rocket science there!
Considering the REF150 or the SE version , I will say it is one of my preferred ARC designs. IMHO the choice of REF75 or REF150 depends mainly on the speakers being used.
I have not had a REF150 in my system since a few years ago, but looking at you photo I only see that the protective insulator of the cover has burned out - I can't see any clearly damaged PCB part. Are you sure of it?
I am not certain that there is any widespread damage, no. And your thoughts echo those of a tech in CT I trust who looked at the same photo. He suggested that the plastic boot over the fuse is a bad idea and that once the fuse and the nearby clearly burnt large resistor are replaced the plastic "boot" (his name for the protective sleeve) should be left off. He said there was no reason for it and could contribute to the problem.
I may just take it to my local pro-audio tech who has done good work in the past on my previous ARC amp, a VS110.
I may just take it to my local pro-audio tech who has done good work in the past on my previous ARC amp, a VS110.
I wonder what the impact of Russian tube shortages will be on ARC. I have a Reference 3 preamp, a Reference CD8 player, and Ref 210 tube monoblocks. Fortunately I accumulated enough KT 120s as a backup. But I’m not sure when I upgrade, I’ll consider ARC again.
It's crazy out there. Say what you will but Kevin Deal is taking a very sophisticated approach, saying "calm down, be patient and I will take care of you". Being such an unreliable tube to begin with I feel bad for anyone who knuckles under and pays more than $200 from an ordinary supplier. ARC was charging $275 a tube back when the others were going for $125 so that is a very good question. One would hope that they have an ample supply of premium tubes. I feel lucky to have eight in a sealed box that were allegedly hand picked and strenuously tested from one of my favorite suppliers, TC Tubes. And of course, I will have four brand new "premiums" coming with the new amp. That could well be a $1500 value. I will be a broken record and say that I am so glad to be getting away from a power amp that used eight KT 150s without auto-bias and in a circuit design where only the best, perfectly matched KT 150's were critical.
Well, my new amp is set up and has about five hours of break-in so far. I am sure no one wants to read about such mundane things as shipping woes but I feel compelled anyway to talk about the condition of the outer ARC shipping box. UPS managed to beat it to within an inch of it's useful life. Multiple gouges that penetrated and pierced the box, destroyed corners, collapsing seams, simply destroyed. UPS had covered several sides with black and yellow tape warning it's employees that the box weighed over 70 lbs. I can only guess this tape motivates the employees to heave the box around even more rather than handling it with care. I have been in this hobby for a long time and have a wall of shipping boxes along one side of my basement, some of which were used for there-and-back return shipping of heavy amps for service or mods, several for very heavy loudspeakers, etc. and nothing approaches the condition of this box. I know the debate never ends but in my world living in Ohio UPS sucks the worst.
Luckily despite the above I found no sign of damage to the amp itself and the box ARC packs at the top containing the manual, tools, and tubes was also fine.
So now onto the little I can tell you. Kudos to ARC for finally realizing that no one likes removing 18 screws to take a flimsy top cover off an amp (the Ref 150 SE) and now they have implemented a clever slide-back and lift design secured by just three hex screws. The top cover is built of thicker pot-metal (that might be harsh) and with sturdier design and reinforcement. That said I could not help but notice that once re-installed with tubes in place the rear flange does not sit parallel to the top plate of the base. Not off by much and no one sits and stares at the back of the amp but at this price little things count. My manual included the usual ARC QC card indicating my amp was built in June of 2021. Warren Gehl's initials are on the final sound check line. The box containing the tubes also includes a screwdriver marked as being meant for adjusting the sensitivity of the ghost meters and yet the manual does not say a word on the subject.
It is obvious that this iteration of the Ref series amps borrows from the Galileo Series in terms of the outer case construction. Beyond a doubt it results in a stiffer less resonant outer-shell though whether that does or does not affect ultimate SQ is unknown. I always felt the construction of the Ref 150 SE was curious with such a seemingly flimsy base supporting such heavy transformers despite any sign of actual flex.
The first time I saw photos of the Ref 160M's I thought the amps were fuggly (Midwest term) and garish. The looks grew on me though unboxing this amp was my first opportunity to see one in person. I still can't say I love the look-though I love the look of the Ref 6 pre-but even after taking into account the pride-of-ownership bias inherent in life, in silver this is a handsome amp. And when powered up the ghost meters add not just flair but some elegance.
Sound? Well, yes, I have sound. Streaming the Shins "The Worm's Heart" on Qobuz though my Aurender W20 into my SW1X DAC III Balanced via a combination of Analysis Plus Silver Apex (DAC to Ref 6) and Cardas Clear Beyond (Ref 6 to Ref 80S) powering Devore O/93's via Cardas Clear and hooked up the 8 ohm taps I heard sound but not music. Wooly bass and a jumbled mess of very familiar music. Ten minutes in I heard a glimpse of a broad soundstage that almost sounded like music but within five minutes more it lapsed back into the jumbled mess. I am being purposefully harsh. The amp is clearly fine and just needs to wake up. Over the rest of the first five hours (until my wife screamed that she had enough since I was outside entertaining friends despite only moderate volume) I heard signs of promise with the bass already firming up.
As should be obvious, I can not yet compare the Ref 80S to the Ref 150 SE in terms of music reproduction. That will follow, likely in two to three weeks.
Luckily despite the above I found no sign of damage to the amp itself and the box ARC packs at the top containing the manual, tools, and tubes was also fine.
So now onto the little I can tell you. Kudos to ARC for finally realizing that no one likes removing 18 screws to take a flimsy top cover off an amp (the Ref 150 SE) and now they have implemented a clever slide-back and lift design secured by just three hex screws. The top cover is built of thicker pot-metal (that might be harsh) and with sturdier design and reinforcement. That said I could not help but notice that once re-installed with tubes in place the rear flange does not sit parallel to the top plate of the base. Not off by much and no one sits and stares at the back of the amp but at this price little things count. My manual included the usual ARC QC card indicating my amp was built in June of 2021. Warren Gehl's initials are on the final sound check line. The box containing the tubes also includes a screwdriver marked as being meant for adjusting the sensitivity of the ghost meters and yet the manual does not say a word on the subject.
It is obvious that this iteration of the Ref series amps borrows from the Galileo Series in terms of the outer case construction. Beyond a doubt it results in a stiffer less resonant outer-shell though whether that does or does not affect ultimate SQ is unknown. I always felt the construction of the Ref 150 SE was curious with such a seemingly flimsy base supporting such heavy transformers despite any sign of actual flex.
The first time I saw photos of the Ref 160M's I thought the amps were fuggly (Midwest term) and garish. The looks grew on me though unboxing this amp was my first opportunity to see one in person. I still can't say I love the look-though I love the look of the Ref 6 pre-but even after taking into account the pride-of-ownership bias inherent in life, in silver this is a handsome amp. And when powered up the ghost meters add not just flair but some elegance.
Sound? Well, yes, I have sound. Streaming the Shins "The Worm's Heart" on Qobuz though my Aurender W20 into my SW1X DAC III Balanced via a combination of Analysis Plus Silver Apex (DAC to Ref 6) and Cardas Clear Beyond (Ref 6 to Ref 80S) powering Devore O/93's via Cardas Clear and hooked up the 8 ohm taps I heard sound but not music. Wooly bass and a jumbled mess of very familiar music. Ten minutes in I heard a glimpse of a broad soundstage that almost sounded like music but within five minutes more it lapsed back into the jumbled mess. I am being purposefully harsh. The amp is clearly fine and just needs to wake up. Over the rest of the first five hours (until my wife screamed that she had enough since I was outside entertaining friends despite only moderate volume) I heard signs of promise with the bass already firming up.
As should be obvious, I can not yet compare the Ref 80S to the Ref 150 SE in terms of music reproduction. That will follow, likely in two to three weeks.
Billion$Baby, I do not. I have only 85 hours on my 80S due to life getting in the way of listening. That said, I am making a concerted effort to listen more and put more hours on the amp. I have zero doubt that the 80S excels over the 150 SE in terms of the ultimate listening experience. I do not believe in "the absolute sound". I am in the late great Art Dudley school of "how does the music make me feel". That said, I do appreciate piano sounding like a piano, sudden sounds like a vocalist unexpectedly shouting from stage left or right creating a startle-response, the sound of an acoustic bass "appearing" as if in the room and I am getting all of those things already. I listened for three hours last night and the low end is firming up nicely where it was previously soft. In comparison, the 150 SE was/is drier and more analytical. The one thing the 150 SE did better was take an iron fisted grip on my woofers. The 80S is not, imo, "tube-y" but instead more fluid and a lot more fun. You can tell it is a very special amp and I have no doubt that the 160M and 160S provide even more of the same.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |