ARC Ref 75 vs. Ref 75 SE

My REF-75 SE now has 375 hours on it. As soon as it hit 300 hours, it really opened up. My early impressions here on AG were for an amp that wasn't broken in. Take my comments I made before and add 30% to my enthusiasm for this amp. What more of a recommendation can one make other than to say that a product far surpasses one's expectations? In the many years of enjoying this hobby, I've had a lot of amps, both solid state and tube. They've ranged from modified Dynaco amps MKIII's and ST-70's (in the early days) to Van Alstine, to
Counterpoint, to Atmosphere and various ARC amps including the Classic 60, a REF-75, and now the REF-75 SE. Nothing so far comes close in my experience to the New ARC SE's.

And we can clearly hear the degradation whenever something unnecessary is put into the circuit. Just turning off the display lights on the ARC SE gear improves the sound. It becomes more relaxed and three dimensional. Who knows what switches intended to save a resistor in the event a tube blows would do to the sound. I guess if one hasn't experienced this phenomenon, its as though it doesn't exist. Go figure.

By the way ... There's 375 hours on my amp now ... and it really opened up at about 300 hours. Phenomenal amp.

OKAY ... full disclosure .. I am an "ARC cheerleader" and proud of it.

On the reliability issue ... I've had an SP6. An SP-14. a Classic 60, a REF-75 and now the REF-75se. I've had all of their phono stages from the PH-3 through to my present PH-8. I've had their CD players from the CD-3 through to my present CD-7se. I used the SP-14 until I upgraded to my present REF-3. I ALWAYS go for the upgrades ... and have never been disappointed with them as the improvements are always significant enough to justify the price of the upgrade.

In all of these years, and with all of this equipment, I've had only one resistor taken out by a failing tube and that was a KT120 in my REF-75. I took it to a fairly local tech who does ARC warrantee work. No problem other than it took a while getting it back.

In the meantime, I had my regular tech go through the Classic 60 and give it a good going over. He replaced the power switch (damaged in the '92 earthquake). He replaced the large capacitors because their measurements were way down. He said that this is normal in old amps. I've owned the CL-60 since the early 80's .. and never a problem what so ever, and the damned thing plays MUSIC! The CL-60 rests under a table in my listening room to be used as a spare. As old as it is, I can't bear to sell it. It just sounds too good.


Other than that one resistor, I have NEVER had a reliability issue with ARC equipment. All I've ever done is replace the tubes when they age. No burn marks on any of my circuit boards either.

I have a reliable source at ARC ... and he told me that they tested the KT-150's for over 5000 hours, on 24/7, with no failures prior to approving them for a replacement in the REF amps that were using KT-120's.

It always amuses me when some guys in these forums knock ARC products. I'm sure they are being very sincere in their assessments. But, here's a question for them ... Should ARC just stop improving their products and call it a day? Or ... should they continue with their R&D and offer upgrades to their customers who are willing to pay for them? Personally, I see nothing nefarious at work here on ARC's part.