ARC Classic versus VT series
Buffstereo
I used to own a Classic 60 that I sold to buy a
VT-60. I later sold that too. I find ARC too hard and analytical since my
tastes have shifted to more 'classic' tube sound. A pair of rebuilt W-4s by
Heathkit sounded much nicer and more elegant to my ears. ARC was the only tube
gear dealer in my area , so that is how I chose them over others. However, I
do regret the cash spent since I discovered vintage gear. It is so much
cheaper and often sounds alot better than the latest set of the 'Emperors New
Clothes' that the glossy magazines rave on about. I don't mean to say that
all the new stuff isn't worth it, but with a bit of care and research, the
vintage gear is a better buy. For what it is worth, the CL-60 had a FET front
end driving a quartet of 6550s in triode configutation in each channel. KT90s
sounded better than the 6550s in the CL-60. The VT-60 used ARCs favorite small
tube, the 6922 ,in the front end driving a pair of 6550s in pentode
configuration per channel. The CL-60 was more detailed and also more musical
with the exception of a rather nasal sounding upper bass regeon. The VT-60 was
more natural and laid back but also less involving, though pleasent. Still,
any number of vintage amps could blow them away by comparison, at my house
anyway. If it has to be ARC, then by all means go for it, but since vintage
stuff gets NO advertising in Stereophile and such, I just wanted to add my 2
cents worth! I hope whatever decision you make, it is one that leaves you
satisfied and with a deeper love of fine music. Good luck!
Robert Thompson
Live and let live!
Sandman
Daniel Soderstrom <ak...@icenet.com.au> wrote in article
<35b83...@cactus.highway1.com.au>...
> I currently have Audio Innovations S1000 monoblocks (50watt ClassA 4xEL34
> per side). Im looking at upgrading to some Audio Research equipment in
the
> future and was wondering whether new ARC VT series (say the VT130) was
> better than the Classic series. The idea of triode operation sounds more
> appealing, yet I realise that this doesnt neccesarily make it better.
>
> I do prefer a warmer sounding amplifier, meaning I dont like a bright
> sounding amplifier. Im in Australia so tracking down a ARC Classic
series
> amp is not going to be easy, nor will it provide a large cost saving as
ARC
> equipment holds its value extremely well here. Is it worth the trouble ?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Daniel Soderstrom.
I got interested in ARC when I heard the Martin Logan Sequel II's driven by
the ARC Classic 30's. I didn't get around to purchasing any Martin Logans
until I moved to a bigger house in late 1992, and by then the Quest Z was
available so I got it instead. I also had my eyes by then on a pair of
Classic 120's but also found them difficult to come by when I could afford
them, so I ended up getting the VTM120 monoblocks instead, same power
output, and I never had the opportunity to audition them both and compare
them at the same time, but was told by numerous people that the VT series
was indeed an improvement over the Classic series. I'm delighted with the
way they drive the electrostatic panels. I've heard the VT100 (and VT200)
recently at HiFi98) and understand from ARC that these models incorporate
some of the circuit designs of the Reference series amps. It's probably
not possible to assemble a Classic series amp with a VT amp with a
Reference amp in the same room at the same time for auditioning, so you're
pretty much left to relying on what ARC has said about these amps and what
others including reviewers have said about their experiences with them.
Hope this helps somewhat.
Sandman
Johnny Y Boey
> I currently have Audio Innovations S1000 monoblocks (50watt ClassA 4xEL34
> per side). Im looking at upgrading to some Audio Research equipment in the
> future and was wondering whether new ARC VT series (say the VT130) was
> better than the Classic series. The idea of triode operation sounds more
> appealing, yet I realise that this doesnt neccesarily make it better.
>
> I do prefer a warmer sounding amplifier, meaning I dont like a bright
> sounding amplifier.
The CL60 was my tube reference for 5yr, until recently replaced by a VT100. The
Krell KSA250 has been my SS reference since 91, and I sold an FPB200 earlier
this year. So you can say that I like the VT100 over the CL60 better than I
like the FPB200 over the old KSA250.
But if like warmer sound, the VT amps won't cut it (especially the 50, 100 and
200). ARC does not voice their products consistently. The latest VT series
tries to be totally neutral. The CL-series has quite a bit more bloom to it.
Bass is very extended for tubes, but will sound fat compared to the equivalent
VT. To me, the CL60 was also a bit softer and the VT100 quicker and much more
focused.
JB
Fred Whitlock
>
>Daniel Soderstrom <ak...@icenet.com.au> wrote in article
><35b83...@cactus.highway1.com.au>...
>> I currently have Audio Innovations S1000 monoblocks (50watt ClassA 4xEL34
>> per side). Im looking at upgrading to some Audio Research equipment in
>the
>> future and was wondering whether new ARC VT series (say the VT130) was
>> better than the Classic series. The idea of triode operation sounds more
>> appealing, yet I realise that this doesnt neccesarily make it better.
>>
>> I do prefer a warmer sounding amplifier, meaning I dont like a bright
>> sounding amplifier. Im in Australia so tracking down a ARC Classic
>series
>> amp is not going to be easy, nor will it provide a large cost saving as
>ARC
>> equipment holds its value extremely well here. Is it worth the trouble ?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>> Daniel Soderstrom.
>
If you like warm, tubey sounding amplifiers, the VT series of Audio Research
are not for you. They are neutral and, if anything, provide a somewhat
bright and forward sound presentation. That's not bad, in my opinion, I
own and use the VT 50 which is simply outstanding for my taste. But if you
want warm and laid back you'd better stick with the Classics. Good
listening.
Fred
AudioNow!
http://www.audionow.com
Johnny Y Boey
> But if you
> want warm and laid back you'd better stick with the Classics.
In fact, the CL-series really isn't that warm and laid-back compared to others
out there. If that's what he wants, he should be looking at another brand
entirely.
JB
Sandman
Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<35B94365...@ix.netcom.com>...
Actually, my experience with the Classic series amps and the VT series amps
is that they're both quite neutral - but full-bodied as opposed to dry -
but slightly more laid-back than forward-sounding, although this may be due
in part to my auditioning of them primarily on electrostatic and hyrbid
electrostatic speakers. I think much of the improvement in the VT series
amps is the utilization of the newest Russian tubes (in my opinion more
musical and more reliable) which simply weren't available at the time the
Classics were in their heyday. BTW, there was a typo in my first post in
this thread - the reference to the Classic 30 should have been to the
Classic 60. I don't know if the Classic 30 could have driven the Sequel
IIs to the levels I auditioned them at.
Sandman
Fred Whitlock
Johnny Y Boey wrote in message <35B94365...@ix.netcom.com>...
>Fred Whitlock wrote:
>
>> But if you
>> want warm and laid back you'd better stick with the Classics.
>
>In fact, the CL-series really isn't that warm and laid-back compared to
others
>out there. If that's what he wants, he should be looking at another brand
>entirely.
>
Fair enough. I'm not suggesting the Classics sound like real classic amps,
I'm just suggesting they aren't quite as bright and forward as the VT's.
Good listening.
Fred
>
>JB
>
Johnny Y Boey
> Why dont you just buy an inexpensive SS amp and, attatch distortion
> pedals to it. Youd save yourself a lot of money.
>
Ignorance is bliss.
Try listening to the ARC CL and VT for a change. You will not notice any
distortion within their limits. You can't achieve the bloom by adding anything to
your 'inexpensive' SS amp.
JB
Walter Billington
wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Daniel Soderstrom <ak...@icenet.com.au> wrote in article
>><35b83...@cactus.highway1.com.au>...
>>> I currently have Audio Innovations S1000 monoblocks (50watt ClassA 4xEL34
>>> per side). Im looking at upgrading to some Audio Research equipment in
>>the
>>> future and was wondering whether new ARC VT series (say the VT130) was
>>> better than the Classic series. The idea of triode operation sounds more
>>> appealing, yet I realise that this doesnt neccesarily make it better.
>>>
>>> I do prefer a warmer sounding amplifier, meaning I dont like a bright
>>> sounding amplifier. Im in Australia so tracking down a ARC Classic
>>series
>>> amp is not going to be easy, nor will it provide a large cost saving as
>>ARC
>>> equipment holds its value extremely well here. Is it worth the trouble ?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>
>>> Daniel Soderstrom.
>>
>If you like warm, tubey sounding amplifiers, the VT series of Audio Research
>are not for you. They are neutral and, if anything, provide a somewhat
>bright and forward sound presentation. That's not bad, in my opinion, I
>own and use the VT 50 which is simply outstanding for my taste. But if you
>want warm and laid back you'd better stick with the Classics. Good
>listening.
Why dont you just buy an inexpensive SS amp and, attatch distortion
pedals to it. Youd save yourself a lot of money.
Walter Billington.
Gruvmyster
Fred Whitlock wrote:
>>>Daniel Soderstrom said:
>>>> I currently have Audio Innovations S1000 monoblocks (50watt ClassA 4xEL34
>>>> per side). Im looking at upgrading to some Audio Research equipment in the
>>>> future and was wondering whether new ARC VT series (say the VT130) was
>>>> better than the Classic series. The idea of triode operation sounds more
>>>> appealing, yet I realise that this doesnt neccesarily make it better...
>>If you like warm, tubey sounding amplifiers, the VT series of Audio Research
>>are not for you. They are neutral and, if anything, provide a somewhat
>>bright and forward sound presentation. That's not bad, in my opinion, I
>>own and use the VT 50 which is simply outstanding for my taste. But if you
>>want warm and laid back you'd better stick with the Classics. Good
>>listening.
>Why dont you just buy an inexpensive SS amp and, attatch distortion
>pedals to it. Youd save yourself a lot of money.
Preposterous, Wally. First, that's not what he asked about. He is
obviously interested in tube gear. Second, even Arny knows there is
great tube stuff out there. Third, this is the third post (tonight)
where you've given an answer to a question that wasn't asked. Are you
sure you can handle it here? If yes, when do you propose to start
posting like you can?
Doug
--
"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The
literature was full of examples that said you can't do this."
-Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M
"Post-It" note pads.
Peter Irwin
> Why dont you just buy an inexpensive SS amp and, attatch distortion
> pedals to it. Youd save yourself a lot of money.
> Walter Billington.
Oh, please.
Have you ever heard an ARC tube amp?
From your comment, I'm darned sure the answer is no.
Someone was asking for subjective comments on amplifiers
which are very likely close to transparent or fully transparent,
and you give some comment about distortion pedals.
Are you just trying to be annoying?
Peter.
(personally, I'd be more interested in a well restored older
amplifier or in a DIY project..)
-----
pir...@ktb.net
William M. Johnson, Jr.
Walter Billington wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 19:26:47 -0500, "Fred Whitlock" <a...@cl-sys.com>
> wrote:
>
> >If you like warm, tubey sounding amplifiers, the VT series of Audio Research
> >are not for you. They are neutral and, if anything, provide a somewhat
> >bright and forward sound presentation. That's not bad, in my opinion, I
> >own and use the VT 50 which is simply outstanding for my taste. But if you
> >want warm and laid back you'd better stick with the Classics. Good
> >listening.
>
> Why dont you just buy an inexpensive SS amp and, attatch distortion
> pedals to it. Youd save yourself a lot of money.
>
> Walter Billington.
Man, do you have any idea how you come across to other people? I'll give you a
few hints:
Mouth open, mind closed.
Intolerant bigot with an agenda against personal preference.
Pretenses of knowledge...pretender.
Paranoid that someone might have different ideas than you,
implying that someone might be smarter than you.
Opinionated without benefit of the facts.
Get a grip, man! You're talking out of your ass!
You're attempting to tell other people how they should feel about
equipment they probably already own. Or jsut insulting it.
That's a GREAT way to get punched out.
The Golden Rule Of The Scientist: Keep an open mind. Without it you are useless
to science.
Second Rule Of The Scientist: Never forget to use your senses. They can often
tell you more than your equipment.
Third Rule: Never think that you and you alone know the truth.
Fourth Rule: If you think you're perfect, try walking on water.
You need to remember all of those, Walter!
Sandman
Peter Irwin <pir...@ktb.net> wrote in article <6pebfc$mcv$1...@dns.ktb.net>...
> In rec.audio.opinion Walter Billington <gu...@a11init.clara.net> wrote:
>
> > Why dont you just buy an inexpensive SS amp and, attatch distortion
> > pedals to it. Youd save yourself a lot of money.
>
> > Walter Billington.
>
> Oh, please.
>
> Have you ever heard an ARC tube amp?
He's probably mulling that one over right now..... hmmmmm.... a defective
amp which has tubes which are ARCing?..... hmmmm....wasn't there a company
once with initials like that that made speakers?.... hmmmmmm.... what's a
"tube" anyway? - something to wrap tissue paper around?
> From your comment, I'm darned sure the answer is no.
>
> Someone was asking for subjective comments on amplifiers
> which are very likely close to transparent or fully transparent,
> and you give some comment about distortion pedals.
>
> Are you just trying to be annoying?
What? Walter/Dave/Whatever annoying? No. No way! Never! Not thinkable!
Forgetaboutit!!!
Sandman
Ned Carlson
Billington) wrote:
>Why dont you just buy an inexpensive SS amp and, attatch distortion
>pedals to it. Youd save yourself a lot of money.
You mean SS sounds so bad, that adding a distortion pedal would be an
improvement?
Ned Carlson Triode Electronics,2225 W Roscoe Chicago, IL, 60618 USA
ph 773-871-7459 fax 773-871-7938
12:30 to 8 PM CT, (1830-0200 UTC) 12:30-5 Sat, Closed Wed & Sun
http://www.triodeel.com
Text file catalogs:Catalog 'Bot at cat...@triodeel.com
Sandman
Ned Carlson <postm...@triodeel.com> wrote in article
<35bfb10b...@news.supernews.com>...
> On Sun, 26 Jul 1998 02:18:27 GMT, gu...@a11init.clara.net (Walter
> Billington) wrote:
> >Why dont you just buy an inexpensive SS amp and, attatch distortion
> >pedals to it. Youd save yourself a lot of money.
>
> You mean SS sounds so bad, that adding a distortion pedal would be an
> improvement?
Good one, Ned! Jeesh, if this dweeb could just listen to some good tube
amplification, just ONCE!! Comparatively, in the midrange and treble, at
least, SS SUCKS!!!
Sandman
Ned Carlson
>> You mean SS sounds so bad, that adding a distortion pedal would be an
>> improvement?
>
>Good one, Ned! Jeesh, if this dweeb could just listen to some good tube
>amplification, just ONCE!! Comparatively, in the midrange and treble, at
>least, SS SUCKS!!!
>
> Sandman
What I want to know is which distortion pedal will
make my crappy Toshiba reciever sound like a tube amp...
A Fuzz Face? TubeScreamer? Q-Tron?
Next I'll try "SET" caps...we'll make this thing sound
like an Ongaku yet.... ;-)
Sandman
Ned Carlson <postm...@triodeel.com> wrote in article
<35c102eb....@news.supernews.com>...
> On 30 Jul 1998 09:11:59 GMT, "Sandman" <sand...@gte.net> wrote:
>
> >> You mean SS sounds so bad, that adding a distortion pedal would be an
> >> improvement?
> >
> >Good one, Ned! Jeesh, if this dweeb could just listen to some good tube
> >amplification, just ONCE!! Comparatively, in the midrange and treble,
at
> >least, SS SUCKS!!!
> >
> > Sandman
>
> What I want to know is which distortion pedal will
> make my crappy Toshiba reciever sound like a tube amp...
> A Fuzz Face? TubeScreamer? Q-Tron?
>
> Next I'll try "SET" caps...we'll make this thing sound
> like an Ongaku yet.... ;-)
Rather than attract a ton of flames and jetstreams of hot concentrated
borgsnot, I took umbrage by responding to your e-mail version of this, Ned.
Nice to see more people here with a sense of humor. ;-)
Sandman