Hi From A New Member and Long Time ARC User

[karma]

Hi All,
I found you through a link that appeared on Audio Asylum. I was looking for a forum that specialized in Audio Research. So, far I've noticed that this has not been a very active forum. Hopefully, that will change.

Here is some information about me. I'm going to go into a little detail to establish conversation points.

I built my first stereo hi fi system in 1962 with Dynakits ST-70, PAS 3 amd FM 3. Been into it ever since. I actually built my first hi fi amp in 1954 with a Heathkit amp. I was quite young. Not any more, the years add up but my ears still work well.

I bought my first ARC gear in the mid 1980's with a D115 Mk II and an SP8 Mk II. These brought me back into the tube world. Soon after I upgraded to an SP-10 Mk II used with expensive (for the day) MM cartridges. Then around 1990 I switched to an SP-11 MkII. Prior to that I had started using low output MC's. I strongly felt that the SP-11 was a better preamp especially with MC's but I also liked the signature (basically none) better. It is the point where the basic ARC sound changed from the romantic to the neutral. Not long after, I upgraded to a D250 Mk II Servo power amp. I still have both the SP-11 and the D250. Obviously, I'm in love with them.

Two years ago I jumped out of the ARC world to buy an Aesthetix Rhea all tube phono preamp. It's signature fit well with my other ARC gear. It's a very nice piece with flexibility to die for.

The remainder of my system was all bought to complement my ARC electronics. My main speakers are Martin Logan CLS IIA electrostatic's biamped with the Kinergetics SW-800 dual subs. The sub amp is a Mark Levinson No. 23 amp (400w/chan into the subs 4 ohm loads).

I listen to 90% analog. My record playing system (the first string system) is a Oracle Delph V with the African Black Granite base and the Turbo power supply. On it I have an Eminent Technology ET2.5 air bearing arm powered with a custom high pressure air supply (28 PSI). It all sits on a fully lead filled Lead Balloon dedicated turntable stand. It weighs about 200 lbs. (not counting the turntable). The cartridge is a Lyra Skala low output MC.

I actually have three turntables connected to the Rhea. Second string (not by much) is a Sota Nova vacuum turntable with another Eminent Technology ET2.5 arm with a Monster Sigma Genesis 2000 low output MC also sitting on a Lead Balloon stand.

Third string is a Thorens TD 125 Mk 1 with a Graham 2.2 Deluxe arm with an Audio Technica OC9/II MC. This turntable is strictly used to audition new/used records where I don't want to subject my good cartridges to records in unknown condition. It actually sounds very good.

Odds and ends include a VPI 17 RCM, a Nakamichi Dragon, a Sony X7 CDP CD player used as a deck and an Anodyne Adept tube DAC, and self-designed and self-made speaker and interconnect cables. I've got a lot of tweaks, most of which actually make sense.

Oh, I forgot to mention that my record collection numbers about 4500 and CD's about 750. I listen mostly to classical and jazz. But my musical tastes are eclectic and my record collection has all types of music in it.

So, that's about it. The total tube count in my system is 50. Yes!! Crazy but true. I hope we will have much to talk about,

Sparky

 

[RBFC]

Welcome to WBF, Sparky. I also had an ET2 tonearm that was powered from an oil-less air compressor at 40psi. Bruce Thigpen sent me a tighter air manifold for the arm. I would get about 1 LP side of air from the 20 gallon tank on the compressor, so I had a silent, pulseless air supply to the arm. Fun old memories!

Lee

 

[karma]

Welcome to WBF, Sparky. I also had an ET2 tonearm that was powered from an oil-less air compressor at 40psi. Bruce Thigpen sent me a tighter air manifold for the arm. I would get about 1 LP side of air from the 20 gallon tank on the compressor, so I had a silent, pulseless air supply to the arm. Fun old memories!

Lee

Hi Lee,
Thanks for the welcome.

The ET arm on my Sota started life as an ET2 which had the low pressure manifold like yours originally had. I too upgraded to the high pressure manifold. Both of my arms are now the high pressure types. The first one I bought in about 1990. The second was bought about two years ago and is the upgraded 2.5 version which comes with the high pressure manifold.

I 'm thinking you ran into some of the same strange problems I encountered when switching to high pressure. For example, every junction between the air line and the various fittings leaked. They just were not designed for the higher pressure. Eventually, I found an easy, cheap, reliable solution. I have a valve to switch the air supply to the arm that is in use and a really nice analog pressure gauge mounted at my system rack.

My air supply is a single cylinder Craftsman shop air compressor that has a storage tank. I don't know its capacity because it's covered by my modifications. I think it is about 15 Gal. Originally, it was incredibly noisy. In order to put it in the house, I had to quiet it down. I was able to do this by modifying the compressor. It's quiet enough so it can live in a closet as far away from my listening position as I can get it. It all works well. I can't hear it.

I love these arms. It sounds like you no longer have yours. Why did to get rid of it?

I noticed that you live in Albuquerque. Well, I live in Los Alamos. I do love the chile in New Mexico.

Sparky

 

[Steve Williams]

Welcome to WBF Sparky

There are a lot of ARC users here and I know what you mean about tube count. When I had my ARC Ref 600 MKlll and Ref 3, I was running 70 tubes.

 

[RBFC]

I had the compressor in my basement, so noise while it ran and refilled was tolerable. I used shop-grade pneumatic tubing (like on air drills, etc.) to a regulator. Then, I adapted the tubing size down to fit the arm. Since I operate the heart/lung machine, I am pretty familiar with setting up leak-free connections with tubing under pressure. I didn't have any air leak troubles! Perhaps we can share war stories someday.

Lee

 

[audioguy]

Since I operate the heart/lung machine,.....

Lee

Lee: there is another Perfusionist who posts here (and on AVS) by the name of CraigJohn. He was in Atlanta some months ago for a conference on his industry and we were able go
spend some time at my home doing some listening!

Sorry for the OT post

* *

 

[microstrip]

Sparky,

It is a pleasure to welcome one more ARC user. You started higher than me - my first ARC system was an D70mk2 and an SP8!
Although it is now in the box I also own an ET2.5 - I have now an air Forsell turntable and tonearm - high pressure pumps and surge tanks also populate the room next to my listening room - I drilled a few holes in the wall for the air tubes and power wires.

Curious than you manage to use the ET2.5 with the Oracle - I had this system in the past and I had to re-level the turntable very often. Is the Mk5 suspension stiffer than that of the mk2 or mk3 ?

 

[karma]

Welcome to WBF Sparky

There are a lot of ARC users here and I know what you mean about tube count. When I had my ARC Ref 600 MKlll and Ref 3, I was running 70 tubes.

Hi Steve,
Thank you for the welcome. 70 Tubes!! WOW.

The running costs for either of our systems is potentially high. I'm in the fortunate position of being technically able to do my own repair work. I have all the necessary tube testers, test equipment, etc., to do the work. I ran a high end hi fi repair shop for over 13 years. It's good I can do my own repairs otherwise I could not afford to own this equipment should a major failure occur.

However, except for tube replacement which anybody can do, this is only a hypothetical expense. In over 20 years of ownership my ARC equipment has never failed beyond the occasional tube! I keep close track of tube life using periodical tube testing and recording the results, thus, tracking the gradual reduction of tube transconductance over time. I also have an hour’s counter on the D250 as a double check. Consequently, I have always been able to replace tubes before failure. I'm speaking primarily about the D250. This has been an incredibly reliable amplifier.

When I first got the amp I knew I would be its primary care giver. So, I built a heavy duty dolly upon which it has resided for its entire time with me. It has never left the dolly. It's there for normal operation as well as for any repairs or modifications. Otherwise, the amp is too heavy for me to move by myself.

After I got the SP-11 I replaced all of its tubes with premium 6922 Bugle Boys. They are still in good shape. No failures in the preamp either after 20 years of use.

I do not roll tubes. It would be silly given the number of tubes I have.

So, I guess, I would tell anybody who brings the issue up, that ARC makes extremely reliable gear as long as one keeps track of tube hours and/or condition. But, if the tubes are allowed to fail, all bets are off. Years ago, when the availability of 6550's was questionable, I did have some infant 6550 failures with the Chinese tubes I was forced to buy. I was lucky that the tube failures did not cause wider damage. Now that we have quality Russian tubes, my early life tube failures are a thing of the past.

Having been through several complete D250 tube changes, the last set I bought was from ARC for the first time. It was expensive but I'm very pleased with the quality of the tubes. I think it is worth the expense verses buying them from a third party.

At some point in the future, I want to discuss the sound quality of my rather long in the tooth ARC equipment verses the newer gear. I will be asking if any of you good folks have had a chance to compare. I have not since I don't have a local dealer here in the wilds of New Mexico. Suffice it to say that I'm extremely happy with my older gear.

Thanks, Sparky

 

[karma]

Sparky,

It is a pleasure to welcome one more ARC user. You started higher than me - my first ARC system was an D70mk2 and an SP8!
Although it is now in the box I also own an ET2.5 - I have now an air Forsell turntable and tonearm - high pressure pumps and surge tanks also populate the room next to my listening room - I drilled a few holes in the wall for the air tubes and power wires.

Curious than you manage to use the ET2.5 with the Oracle - I had this system in the past and I had to re-level the turntable very often. Is the Mk5 suspension stiffer than that of the mk2 or mk3 ?

HI microstrip,
I appreciate your welcome.

My Delphi V is the first Oracle I have owned but I have heard about suspension problems others have had with earlier models. I was a bit worried about it. But the version V design seems to have completely solved those problems. My table has been exceptionally stable, even more so than my Sota Nova. I'm very happy with it.

When I initially bought the Delphi, I mounted a Graham 2.2 Deluxe arm on it. This arm is not as sensitive to leveling issues as is the ET arm. So, the feedback I received about suspension instability did not much concern me. However, I became concerned when I mounted the ET arm. It has not been a problem in over two years. I think it is not a problem at all.

I think that any suspended turntable will suffer suspension changes over time. Springs are not perfect. My Sota requires that the ET arm be releveled about every six months. The changes are tiny and has never caused an arm tracking problem. But I know its history so the releveling is kind of like a routine oil change. The changes are still going on after 20 years. I expect them to continue. I consider this to be acceptable performance given that releveling is so easy to perform. So far, my Delphi has been better.

You should consider selling your ET arm. There are many folks out there looking for one.

I have read about the Forsell gear for years but I have never seen or heard one. I'm jealous. Beyond the basic turntable performance parameters (speed stability, lack of noise, freedom from being affected by external influences), my primary prioritys are reliability, resolution, detail, and base solidity. It is in these areas I would love to compare Forsell to my current set-up.

The function of a tone arm is to provide a happy home for the cartridge. I believe, and have measured, that linear air bearing arms do this basic job better than any other design. Pivoted arms are inherently flawed.

Sparky

 

[mullard88]

Hi Sparky,

Welcome. My first Audio Research electronics were the SP 8 and D 70. I later upgraded the D 70 to a D 115. There was also a point in time when I had an Oracle Delphi turntable with an ET 2 tonearm. I have a lot of pleasant memories of the Audio Research combinations and the Oracle - ET combination. My taste took a turn for a bias out of the romantic camp when I discovered Spectral. Later, I discovered the joys of being able to play "conductor" by coloring the sound using different equipment combinations and I revisited Auido Research electronics. My favorite Audio Research preamp is the SP 3 and my favorite Audio Research amp is the D 76. I have gone through three Oracle Delphi turntables. I gave away the last one when the belt needed to be replaced. I am now using two DPS turntables, one has a single phase motor and the other one has a three phase motor.

Sam

 

[karma]

Hi Sparky,

Welcome. My first Audio Research electronics were the SP 8 and D 70. I later upgraded the D 70 to a D 115. There was also a point in time when I had an Oracle Delphi turntable with an ET 2 tonearm. I have a lot of pleasant memories of the Audio Research combinations and the Oracle - ET combination. My taste took a turn for a bias out of the romantic camp when I discovered Spectral. Later, I discovered the joys of being able to play "conductor" by coloring the sound using different equipment combinations and I revisited Auido Research electronics. My favorite Audio Research preamp is the SP 3 and my favorite Audio Research amp is the D 76. I have gone through three Oracle Delphi turntables. I gave away the last one when the belt needed to be replaced. I am now using two DPS turntables, one has a single phase motor and the other one has a three phase motor.

Sam

HI Sam,
Thanks very much for your welcome.

It seems that you and I have very different philosophys concerning audio. You seem to be in the romantic camp while I am in the objective camp. Which is better? I don't know. I only know what I like and what I'm willing to spend my money on. It seems to me that you would be better served with other gear such as Conrad Johnson or VTL. CJ, in particular, does some amazing things with tonal balance and sonic perspective. Better, I think than any ARC gear for that particular kind of presentation.

OTH, I think that ARC does other things better than any company out there. I like the utter neutality of ARC. In my view, Audio truth is obtained by a completely neutral presentation. My entire system is designed around this goal.

We are different.

Sparky

 

[amirm]

It is amazing how coincidences work. In the process of arguing a point on another forum, I landed on evaluation of one of two amps ever by the Swedish AES society to have been deemed transparent in a blind test of comparing their input to output. One was the Byrston. And then other, drum rolls please..... Audio Research! Here is from the man who ran the tests (Ing Ohman): [F/E testing is input to output comparison testing]:

"One of the most transparent amplifier (thus giving low detectability
in F / E-listening) that I encountered during my early experiments with F/E-
listening (in the 70's) was an Audio Research, with very many tubes in! "

Everyone says tubes color the sound. Yet this is one of only two amps he has ever found that don't color the sound.

And oh, welcome to the forum Sparky.

 

[MylesBAstor]

HI Sam,
Thanks very much for your welcome.

It seems that you and I have very different philosophys concerning audio. You seem to be in the romantic camp while I am in the objective camp. Which is better? I don't know. I only know what I like and what I'm willing to spend my money on. It seems to me that you would be better served with other gear such as Conrad Johnson or VTL. CJ, in particular, does some amazing things with tonal balance and sonic perspective. Better, I think than any ARC gear for that particular kind of presentation.

OTH, I think that ARC does other things better than any company out there. I like the utter neutality of ARC. In my view, Audio truth is obtained by a completely neutral presentation. My entire system is designed around this goal.

We are different.

Sparky

You should hear the latest gen of cj, namely the GAT pre and ART amps

 

[MylesBAstor]

It is amazing how coincidences work. In the process of arguing a point on another forum, I landed on evaluation of one of two amps ever by the Swedish AES society to have been deemed transparent in a blind test of comparing their input to output. One was the Byrston. And then other, drum rolls please..... Audio Research! Here is from the man who ran the tests (Ing Ohman): [F/E testing is input to output comparison testing]:

"One of the most transparent amplifier (thus giving low detectability
in F / E-listening) that I encountered during my early experiments with F/E-
listening (in the 70's) was an Audio Research, with very many tubes in! "

Everyone says tubes color the sound. Yet this is one of only two amps he has ever found that don't color the sound.

And oh, welcome to the forum Sparky.

Not always Amir. I remember listening to a tube amplifier with a friend of mine a while back and he turned to me and said, "well they've succeeded where no one else has. They've managed to make a tube amplifier sound like a solid-state amp." Bada-bing.... :0

 

[DonH50]

Tube amps are by nature much more load-sensitive than SS, so the results of such a test depends heavily on the test load and/or speaker.

To add something on-topic, welcome aboard!

I had some ARC gear through the years, and one of my best-sounding setups used a modified SP3a1, D79, and Counterpoint SA220 (active crossover) into a pair of Magnepan MG-IIIa's. Still using the speakers (driven by cheap Emotiva amps that sound OK to me, proving how far I have fallen, I suppose ), but sold the D79, and need to sell the SP3 and SA220 (just haven't gotten around to it, plus thinking about sending the SP3 to ARC to upgrade, but would have to return it to stock first).

 

[karma]

You should hear the latest gen of cj, namely the GAT pre and ART amps

HI Miles,
It's funny how small the audio world can be. It's an honor to communicate with you. Thanks for your input. I know very few people that I think know as much, have as much experience or have enriched the high end world as much as you have.

Sparky

 

[MylesBAstor]

HI Miles,
It's funny how small the audio world can be. It's an honor to communicate with you. Thanks for your input. I know very few people that I think know as much, have as much experience or have enriched the high end world as much as you have.

Sparky

Yes, welcome aboard Sparky!

Look forward to conversing with you here!

I tend to think of it as passion

 

[DaveyF]

HI Sam,
Thanks very much for your welcome.

It seems that you and I have very different philosophys concerning audio. You seem to be in the romantic camp while I am in the objective camp. Which is better? I don't know. I only know what I like and what I'm willing to spend my money on. It seems to me that you would be better served with other gear such as Conrad Johnson or VTL. CJ, in particular, does some amazing things with tonal balance and sonic perspective. Better, I think than any ARC gear for that particular kind of presentation.

OTH, I think that ARC does other things better than any company out there. I like the utter neutality of ARC. In my view, Audio truth is obtained by a completely neutral presentation. My entire system is designed around this goal.

We are different.

Sparky

Sparky, I'm a fan of the ARC D series amps also. I own an ARC D70Mk2 with rolled in tubes. This amp has seen off several more recent amps including the VT series and several BAT amps. The D70 Mk2 absolutely sings with my Sonus Faber Guarneri's ( a match made in heaven).

IMHO, the D70, D115, D250 and M100's are some of the best amps that ARC ever made, IMO, superior in many ways, to ARC's more recent offerings ( Although the D250 did not have a great reliability record, and the biasing scheme on all of this series is almost criminal...Luckily I have a great tech).BTW, there is a rumor going around currently that David Chesky is looking to buy a D70Mk2 or Classic 60 for a reference system based around the original Quads.

 

[karma]

Sparky, I'm a fan of the ARC D series amps also. I own an ARC D70Mk2 with rolled in tubes. This amp has seen off several more recent amps including the VT series and several BAT amps. The D70 Mk2 absolutely sings with my Sonus Faber Guarneri's ( a match made in heaven).

IMHO, the D70, D115, D250 and M100's are some of the best amps that ARC ever made, IMO, superior in many ways, to ARC's more recent offerings ( Although the D250 did not have a great reliability record, and the biasing scheme on all of this series is almost criminal...Luckily I have a great tech).BTW, there is a rumor going around currently that David Chesky is looking to buy a D70Mk2 or Classic 60 for a reference system based around the original Quads.

HI Davy,
While one amp hardly constitutes a statistical truth, I would have to disagree with the validity of your reliability statement concerning the D250. With the exception of a few early blown Chinese 6550's, my amp has been totally reliable over a period of over 20 years. Impressively so, in fact. If the reputation you speak of is true, (not sure it is) I belive it is entirely due to unreliable 6550's.

You see, this amp uses 20 6550's. Around the early to mid 1990's, when the amp was still a current product, just getting 6550's was a challenge. Almost all tube manufacturing had gone out of business. Even NOS 6550's were unobtainium. I was fearful that I might have to replace my beloved D250 because of a lack of tubes. I never bought from ARC which probably would have solved the problem but I think they too were suffering from the lack of good tubes. About the only source for 6550's were the Chinese. These tubes were very unpredictable. Of the 40 Chinese 6550's I bought from third parties, about a third of them failed early in their life. Once I managed to get set of reliable tubes, life was good and I got good life from them.

I do understand that from the point of view of the average end user, a failed amp is a failed amp, no matter the cause. They will blame ARC and that's fair. But it may not be accurate. Consider that all the D series (and the M100) amps used the same audio signal circuit design. The main differences can be found in the number of 6550's that were used and the complexity of the power supplies. They all used the same bias current value and each tube produced the same amount of power. So, more tubes, more power. With the 6550's being so problematic, the more 6550's used, the more problems that could be statistically expected. And the D250 had by far the most of any of the D series. So, it's entirely possible the D250 experienced more failures than the other D series amps. But, again, this would be due the number of 6550's used in the design. Once the 6550 problems were fixed, the D250 has proven itself to be reliable.

Now that the Russian's are producing good 6550's, I have had zero problems.

I consider the D250 to be a VERY reliable amplifier which I find somewhat amazing given they have a total of 32 tubes inside.

As for bias setting, the D250 is actually rather easy. True, one does have to remove the cover and make a measurement with a voltmeter but it is easy and the test points are readily accessable. Of course, there are 16 values to adjust, one for each output tube, but that's the price for such a great amp. And the bias values are very stable so it does not have to be done often. The D250 version I have with the Servo feature actually compensates bias according to remaining tube life.

Now, if a person (you?) has absolutely no electronics experience or confidence, the matter is more complicated. In this case the only thing that makes sense is have a tech make a house call since lifting this brute of an amplifier is a multiperson job. One really would not want to take it to a shop.

Bias setting is really not a big deal considering the stability of the bias values.

Thus speaketh one who knows!

Sparky

 

[DaveyF]

"HI Davy,
While one amp hardly constitutes a statistical truth," Sparky, that is very true. I'm sure that like you say many of the older 6550's ( read Chinese) of the day were a problem, however, I had a friend who used to own this amp when new and it was using the GE 6550's ( a great tube IMO)...He had numerous failures in a short period of time. So much so, that his dealer took the amp back and refunded him! At the time, I talked to several ARC dealers who told me that this amp was notorious for un-reliability
Possibly the cause of these issues, was that the power supply was too stressed ( according to one dealer I spoke to). Anyhow, this model garnered a rep for unreliability here in the States that seems to have followed it to this day. If you had an exception, then I say good on you.
My comment about the biasing scheme is based on my belief that the procedure that the less technically inclined ( yes, like myself) is expected to go through to bias the amp is IMHO unreasonable. I see no reason why any consumer product, particularly one from a larger well-respected Co., could not have had a simpler biasing method ( and frankly less dangerous) I used to own a Melos tube amp of the same vintage as the D70....it could be biased by a simple turn of a screw that changed a pot wherein an LED either lit green if correct or red if not That's what I call 'user friendly'----This amp didn't sound in the same league as the D70, but that's another story