Copy it, start making and sell for half price.
59 responses Add your response
I your Ref 10 is under warranty it should be covered. Talk to your dealer. The top of my Ref 5se had a slight warp from heat. I complained to my dealer and he asked if I would prefer a metal cover instead. I told him a replacement poly cover seemed pointless. ARC sent me a replacement metal cover under warranty. My Ref 5se was almost a year old at that point.
Expensive stuff usually means expensive parts and support, just like with cars.
Same laws of physics apply to all luxury items.
They know we can't do without and everything must be perfect. There is no escape.
Tell them you can't afford it and your willing to sell the thing and take an even bigger loss just on principle.
Maybe they'll cut a deal to help keep a customer happy.
I own an ARC pre-amp and like it and ARC a lot. I've bought replacement tubes from ARC. They were not cheap (almost as much as your lid) but of good quality and have lasted pretty long (jinx...not I hope). So I was happy.
" ...It is a design flaw and ARC knows it."
Hmmmm, no it's not a design flaw. If the unit is placed on top of a rack and air allowed to circulate freely around it, then the top will not warp.
However, if ventilation is restricted, then warping is a possibility. For those users, a metal top is offered.
You could think of the acrylic top as "the canary in the goldmine." I think it's important for gear to be properly ventilated ... especially tube equipment. And I haven't had any problems with the acrylic tops.
Kinda glad that when ARC did the SE upgrade on my Ref 5 they kept the original aluminum top. IMO, I like the black metal top better than a see through plastic job.
As an aside, I've read comments from some who say that the tops on the Ref 5 SE and Ref 150 SE can cause microphonic issues. FWIW, I took the top off my Ref 150 SE. Can't hear any difference. I think it's audiophile BS.
My Ref5 SE is only a week old. I'm pretty sure I am not paying for a new lid! Squeaky wheel gets the grease, you remain passive and a Sheep, and they will run over you along with everyone else trying to make a dollar.
This is for Cleeds, you work for ARC? It is a flaw. If you bought a new roof for your residence and it bowed the first day of hot weather is that a flaw? Yes or no. Selective reading? My own unit sits on top of my audio rack, and it still bows.
Markwatkiss, I've owned several BMW's...and still own one. And I do know that when you buy one, you sign up for the insane maintenance costs that go along with it. I've done that since 1984 and wouldn't have it any other way. After more than 30 years of BMW's, I've been conditioned to expect costly maintenance.
You, buy a $30k preamp, the mfg and dealer expect you to know what league you're playing in and not to wince when presented with any type of bill. Dorothy, you're not in Kansas anymore.
BMW has similar story to ARC. Basically it's not complicated and easier to repair than most of domestic cars and far most of japanese cars as well. The 'BRAND' drives the maintenance prices UP while the effort is substantially smaller vs. most of the cars on the market. I own 1997 318i convertible as 'garaged toy' and previously owned 1978 2002TTI. Neither one had ever been touched by any professional shop. In 90's I ordered parts mostly from Europe and Middle East and later on with internet handy I order parts from FCP Euro that are more than half-way down from dealer prices.
Enjoyed BMW (bring my wallet) a couple decades w/several 80's era cars & 1 magical '95 R100RT. the older stuff was simpler & easier to fix - the newer stuff forget about it says my independent mechanic for my '88 535is that I finally unloaded w/200K a few years ago. Owned a few ARC pieces never had any issues but they didn't stay around long. Go Music Reference & be happy & done with it.
I've been pondering a pair of Audio Research Ref 610T tube amplifiers. $45k when new, can now be had for $14k. I've been thinking long and hard about acquiring a pair, but the specter of the $4K cost to re-tube haunts me. If I pull the trigger on a pair, I know that EVERYTHING associated with maintenance and repair will be expensive. Even the shipping back and forth to the factory will be expensive.
Ah, the world and the way it works! I had to laugh (maybe cry) when I saw this post.
The ice dispenser in the door of my Viking fridge broke. (Note - this is endemic to Viking, they all break and there's a class action law suit out there seeking money for those hit with the problem). Anyway, the replacement plastic box that holds ice (full disclosure, it contains the auger for the dispenser, too) was exactly ....you guessed it.....$510. Either ARC owns Viking or $510 is the new magic number for luxury replacement parts costing $25 to manufacture..
For further context, my late labrador retriever once chewed up the plastic release button on the tip of the handbrake of my Porsche Carrera. This is 5 cents worth of plastic. Porsche wanted $1700 to replace the entire hand brake which, they explained, involved removing the drivers seat for installation. No, I did not kill the dog, but it's the last Porsche I'll ever own.
This kind of nonsense feels like a Darwinian imperative for those of us who buy this shit in the first place. It's like wearing a "Kick me!" sign on your back. Sadly, we've all done this to ourselves.
Nice Bdp24 - I've always wanted to try an RM200 but don't need the horsepower w/my speakers. I remember Modjeski saying he was at an audio show a few years ago & the big ARC monoblocks mentioned above were playing & on display. He observed & commented to the salesperson that one of the sixteen kt88's in one of the monoblocks was about to go south as the gettering was about toast. I'll never forget his rather candid comment that "16 output tubes in an amp was a sickening sight" :)
Ha! That is so funny, and so great. Roger sees the designs of a lot of expensive electronics as gratuitous and vulgar. He can point to particular aspects in the results of a John Aldridge Stereophile bench test, ascribe them to elements of the circuit's design, and predict the behavior of the circuit with different speaker loads. He did just that with the D'Agostino power amp, wondering why anyone would want to own or even listen to such a poorly designed amp. He tore it to shreds, one design aspect at a time. Absolutely brilliant! Being an expert in tube amp design, Roger highly disapproves of amps with large numbers of tubes, explaining exactly why it is a bad idea, and why.
Roger is very different from a lot of the designers in High End, having a normally-sized ego in spite of his vast knowledge, abilities, and creativity. I'm sure he and Keith Herron would get on great. If I was in the market for a lower powered tube amp, the Music Reference RM-10 would be my first choice. Roger's new products include an ESL speaker with a dedicated, direct coupled, transformer-less tube power amp. For owners of high-efficiency speakers he has a number of low-power triode (SE and otherwise) amps at very reasonable prices.
Why Roger and his products aren't more widely owned and talked about is a complete mystery to me. Sure, he isn't much into marketing, and doesn't have a vast dealer network (thankfully I had Brooks Berdan, a big fan of Roger and his products, as a dealer. And Brooks was extremely critical.). But if I know of him, I see no reason why anyone else can't.
Pehare, I neglected to mention the amp of Rogers that should be of particular interest to Magneplanar owners. The RM-300 is a 300 watt mono block (with the same basic circuit as that of the RM-200) which may be the best tube amp available for driving Maggies. Why? Because, unlike all other tube amps of which I am aware, it's power output increases with falling impedance, not decreases. Many Maggie owners have to settle for solid state amps because tubes don't like the very low impedance load the speaker presents an amp, when they would rather use a tube amp. The RM-300 makes that possible. Unfortunately the amp is $9000, $18,000 a pair. Still, that's less than a lot of the more well known and owned amps that Maggie users buy.
A long time ago I worked in high tech aerial photography and we used Zeiss cameras. We lost a lens cover which is a square aluminum plate with a tab on one end and a handle and latch on other. Zeiss wanted something like $3K for the lens cover to go onto a $400K camera. Of course, you can consider that it is designed to ride in bottom of a plane and if something comes loose it could be a big problem, etc. We took another one to a local machine shop and had it reconstructed from scratch for $500 and it worked perfectly.
In the ARC case, the customer alienation factor of having someone sitting there looking at their amp and thinking of how they got ripped off every time they look at it would not be worth it in the grand scheme. The company's success will not rest upon the sale of $510 covers.
Say what you want about D'agostino. He is one of the most respected designers out there. Plus after 30 years with Krell he had to start fresh with a new company. You will find a lot of the better high end stores in the country carrying his line.
Outside of audiogon I have not heard Rogers name mentioned. And I have went to a lot of audiophile meetings and have attended several shows along with visiting many shops. The only time I have ever seen his gear is years ago at Brooks Berdan.
11-09-15 Why have a cover at all? most of the rf is generated by ics ... Geoffkait
... why have a cover at all?"
One good reason is because the electric current inside of a tube amp or preamp is potentially deadly, often for quite a while even after AC power is turned off.
Just use a plexiglass cover. Works great.
Hey, I didn't say it about D'Agostino's amp, Roger did! But as Roger pointed out, so did John Atkinson, in his comments on the results of his bench tests of the amp. Between the lines of course, as Roger also pointed out. For anyone wanting to read an evaluation of the amp's design from a circuit design expert's perspective (recommended for anyone contemplating it's purchase), it should be easily found on the Music Reference Audiocircle Forum.
As for Roger's credentials versus, in this case, Dan D-Agostino's, it reminds me of when back in the 70's Frank Van Alstine had the nerve to offer a mod for the Audio Research SP-3. Why, the SP-3 was designed by Bill Johnson, the best designer in High End! Who does Frank Van Alstine think he is? He doesn't even make his own products, just modifies those of others. Frank claimed his mod corrected a number of faults in the SP-3 (inaccurate RIAA equalization, insufficient gain at low frequencies, circuit instability, etc.). And guess what---it did, as Harry Pearson wrote in TAS. After that, every owner of an SP-3 wanted the Van Alstine SP-3 mod. The fact alone that Dan D'Agostino has a higher profile than Roger Modjeski---does that invalidate Roger's evaluation of Dan's amp?
Just so you'll know, Roger Modjeski is not one of those guys who finds fault with everyone else's designs. He thinks highly of Mike Sanders (Quicksilver), Tim DeParavicini (EAR), and Ralph Karsten (Atma-Sphere), amongst other current designers.
Brooks Berdan, the most critical listener I've ever know, sold only products he liked, business be damned. What he liked in tubed electronics were VTL, Jadis, and Music Reference. Period. In solid state he found little to like, but loved the amp of Richard Brown, the BEL. Like Roger, Richard had an underground cult reputation for his design abilities. Talk about a low profile! Brooks couldn't keep the amp in stock---every time he demoed his, the listener bought it! It would take months to get another, as Richard built them on his kitchen table, one at a time. Does the fact that Brown Electronics Company had few dealers, were never reviewed or talked about on Hi-Fi sites, and are owned by almost no one, mean that Richard's opinion of an amp's design would not be not worthy of consideration? Or that his qualifications to even have one are in question? If so, I suggest no one ask Jeff Beck to evaluate the playing of, say, Eddie Van Halen. A bad analogy perhaps, but you get the point.