|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
64.131.55.193
In Reply to: ARC Classic 60 versus ARC VT130. posted by vinyl-addict on March 17, 2007 at 12:10:33:
The VT130 bass is somewhat more lean. Actually, all the ranges
of sound are more lean. While the Classic 60 is both tube and classic, I'd have to say it's character is
very, well, ARC. The VT-130 is more of the same with even less weight. The VT130 is a nice amp
when intelligently used as a high amp in a biamp situation, but
other than that, I tend to avoid it for these reasons.The Classic 120's (not so much the 150's) would be slightly better choice if you need more power.
It's a darn shame the 130's look so nice, I wish I liked the sound better.System resluts may vary, but not a lot I'd guess.
Good luck,
Follow Ups:
This is why I went to conrad johnson,11A or the 12 mono blocks your way ahead of the game!
I must respectfully disagree with RFG here. The V-70 (almost identical to the Classic 60) and the VT-130SE are two of several ARC amps that I have owned. While I liked the Classic 60/V-70, the VT-130SE is superior in every way, and when properly tubed and capped, is one of the best sounding amps I have ever heard.Over it's history, ARC has made both fully tube and hybrid solid sate/tube amplifiers and pre-amplifiers. Perhaps the most significant fundamental design difference between the two amplifiers you are considering is that the Classic 60 is really a hybrid circuit design and the VT-130 is an all tube design. Many, myself inculded, believe that the ARC hybrid designs tend to exhibit the "dry or sterile sound" which you and many others seem to find objectionable. I always prefer the ARC all tube designs as they rarley give up anything in the way of definition and tend to be much more liquid, smooth, and 3D palpable across the frequency range than their hybrid counterparts.
When ARC introduced the early VT series amps (VT-60, 120, 130, 150) as a replacement for the Classic/V series, they reverted to an all tube design. Unfortuantely, they didn't include Infinicaps on the initial production, and this upgrade is important for these amps. You may also wish to consider retubing them with Svetlana KT88s (the real winged C ones) and NOS 6h23s as opposed to the (fake) Sveltana/Sovtek 6550s and the POS Sovtek 6922s. Some people prefer the (real winged C) Svetlana 6550 power tubes as they are a little more "energetic" and have better bass control, but I find that the KT88 tubes are so vastly superior in the midrange and treble presentation and deliver a lifelike full-bodied breathiness and authority in mids, highs and lows, that more than makes up for the slight relative lack of bass definition. No one prefers the ARC standard Sovtek 6922s to decent NOS tubes in the 6dj8/6922 famnily. A word of warning: the KT88s may prove less reliable in the amp and certainly require more constant bias monitoring, which is reason enough to consider the SE version, let alone the additional power supply energy storage capacity and the nifty looking faceplate.
IMO, it is unfortunate that the all balanced design (no single-ended inputs) of the V-series, and the early VT series amps inhibited the popularity of these amplifiers, and that of the VT series' all tube LS preamp counterparts, they are truly some of ARC's best work. And to answer your question about the VT-130 midrange: truly stunning if your source can deliver it to the amp accurately.
During the time I owned these amps I used them in systems containing:
Naim CDX CD player, BAT VK-30SE preamp, ARC SP-8 preamp, ARC LS-5 Mk II preamp, Wilson Watt/Puppy 2/1, 2/2, and 3/2 speakers, Martin Logan Sequel II speakers, ProAc Response 3 speakers, and as solid state comparison Spectral DMC-20 Series I and DMA-80 monoblocks. Cable & Interconnect: Nordost SPM and Blue Heaven interconnect, MIT Proline 330, 750 Tube Terminator, and MIT/Spectral Ultralinear. Chang Lightspeed power conditioning.
.
Hello, having owned both the ARC Classic 60 and the ARC VT130 I would have to say I agree with Gadsons on this. IMO the VT130 was better on all accounts then the Classic 60. It was fuller, rounder in tone, had better lows mids and highs, less grain, and had better resolution of detail at all frequencies. Let us not forget it also has a little extra wattage with a larger energy storage of joules for dynamic authority on those peaks.That being said .... the BAT VK-75se IMHO is just in a different universe then both of them, as is the BATVK-60 for that matter. Hope you find the right amp for you and you enjoy the search.
Was the VT series push pull triode or ultralinear. I know the classic series was triode. My friend has the VT-140 monoblocks. He claims this is the same as the classic series with the only difference being balanced instead of single ended. I wonder if this amp is a hybrid triode amp. Have you heard the latest 110 or 220 monoblocks by Audio Research in the reference series. I believe these have much more joules and are push pull all tube ultralinear designs. People who have heard these say they are the best Audio Research has done.
The VT series amps are push-pull. I did not remember that the Classic series amps were triode, but it does sound familiar. Your friend probably has the very rare V-140 as ARC did not make a VT-140. I believe that the V-140 is basically one V-70 per channel. Leonard at ARC once told me that the only differences between the V-70 and the Classic 60 were the balanced only inputs in the V series and an "improved" startup circuit. I have yet to hear the new Ref amps. I have heard good things but I was not a fan of the previous generation ARC 6h30 implementations. The reviews seem to indocate that they got their problems with that tube straightened out and I am eager to give the new stuff a listen.
I agree with Gadsons. The midrange of the VT-130's is
very nice. The highs are not bad either. Judging from
Gadsons list of gear and wire, he prefers a cleaner sound.
The SP-8 ARC is probably an exception. I also own even now,
an LS-5 mk.II, and think it to be dynamic and quite good- probably
one of my favorite ARC pre's. But ultimately, Spectral,
Watt Puppy's, ProAc's, ML stats, even Nordost and MIT all tend to be
less romantic and more accurate equipment. I think judging from
that list, Gadson prefers clean sound. That's great. We all
have our own path to follow, just not my cup of tea.As always, context, room, music and system
will be determinates of ultimate sound, as well as taste.
If you are looking to buy used, fortunately you can likely
get as much out of any of these amps as you've paid. If
it ends up being a lateral move, heck at least you tried. It may be just
the ticket for what you're looking for, no harm in
trying, but above all make your own decisions as to what you
like- take none of our words as gospel.
I've had the VT130 for years and while I've not heard the Classic 60, I've compared the VT130 to a BAT VK75SE. The ARC is more "ultralinear" sounding, with less supple mids & treble but good discipline and musicality all across the range and good bass control. I never had much luck with KT-88s or KT-90s, which I found sounded lean relative to 6550s. The Infinicaps do make a nice improvement in smoothness & realism & it would easy to make the upgrade yourself, replacing the four stock MIT coupling caps with any good teflon. No reason to buy the SE version if you can operate a multimeter to rebias.
I do agree with Dave here somewhat. The stock VT-130 is more "ultralinear" but less supple than a BAT VK-75SE, but I would add that a tube rolled and infinicapped SE is only vey slightly less subtle (maybe 5-10%) and a good deal more "powerfully" full and rich without losing much neutrality. I opted not to "upgrade" to the BAT amp after extended auditioning as I found it better in some ways, but not all, and not worth the (used to new) price differential. At the same price point I would carefully audition both and with system matching in mind. The BAT VK-75SE is also one of the best amps I have ever heard.As for the difference btween the normal and SE versions. I found that the power supply energy storgae makes a difference (280 vs. 325 joules), and while not as hassle free as BAT's autobiasing, it was nice NOT to have to pull out a screwdriver and hook up a multimeter to check and adjust biasing. It just means that you end up checking, adjusting, and optimizing bias more often.
Thanks, I didn't know the power supplies were enlarged in the VT130SE. The VK75SE has the silky sweet character of a zero-feedback triode amp in spades without any plush affectations. The BAT is also more resolving than the ARC. But the ARC is a fine amp and I remember William Z. Johnson saying it had about 80% of what the much more expensive VT150 monos had to offer. Today the value holds up in very attractive used prices for these "plain jane" looking amps. Mine is for sale if anybody's interested...
Thank you for the response. I am actually looking for a bit more weight so this helps. Have you owned either of these amps? I have seen others mention the Classic series as being leaner than the VT series. I may end up bi-amping with the Classic 60 although the speaker manufacturer didn't really favour it, Harbeth M40 are the speakers BTW. I have a solid state amp so bi-amping is an option, albiet an option with challenges, IE gain matching.
A close friend uses a Classic 60, I've owned Classic 120's both
stock and modded, and I've worked on and tested many VT-130's.
I don't really have much great to say about 130's, I wanted to
buy some myself as a potential upgrade and avoided it after
listening to them and discussions with a friend who's intimately
familiar with them who concurred with my assessment.As another poster said, the hybrids are a bit brash at times
probably due to the transistor front end input stage which is
probably ultimately why I sold them. I fear the 130's have a
less brash behavior, but are weaker in other areas.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: