GMorris: I heard the LS2 vs. the LS5 at an ARC dealer in SaltLakeCity. This was right after a weekend home trial of the SonicFrontiers SFL-2 over that year's Memorial Day weekend. I remember this time well as I was having a most difficult time finding a musical replacement of the SP-10 that I sold before I found a replacement. That was not very bright! I quickly found the SFL-2 to not be musical at all so I went back to SLC to borrow the LS2. Afterall, both of these got the highly coveted Stereophile Class A rating. Well the LS2 was the same lack of musicality as the SFL-2. This was near the end of the LS2's production and the LS5 had already gone to a MK II status, so I gotta believe the LS2 I heard at the dealer was also a MK II. But I can't be sure. The LS5 was also Class A rated but it was so far ahead of the SFL-2 and LS2, how they could be grouped together was beyond me. And the LS3 was also Class A rated. From that event forward, I realized how worthless these ratings had become. The LS5II I got had 10 Sovtek 6922 tubes. I soon replaced these with the batch of RAM low-noise tubes I had been using with the SP-10. There was clearly an improvement, but not really all that significant. And even today, as I swap out Mullard, Siemens, Telefunken and Amperex tubes in my Aesthetix gear, these all have a more refined sound over the Sovtek, but the Aesthetix with the Sovtek tubes, as was the case of the LS5 with Sovtek tubes, sound pretty darn good. I gotta believe that no matter what you do with the one tube in the LS2, you are pretty much against the wall on performance. This unit needs a whole more help in the 3-dimensionality dept. than simply a tube swap. John |
JaFox: Thanks for taking the time to respond to my post. Our divergent opinions again underscore how the perception of a components performance is dependent on the associated equipment and personal preference. The LS2B MKII mated well with the ARC D115MKII and also the VT100 MKII. My speakers at the time were the MG 3A followed by the MG 3.5s. The ribbon tweeters would have ruthlessly revealed any perceived brightness. Admittedly, LP piano recordings could sound mechanical (e.g. too pronounced leading edge) if the VTA was not properly adjusted. I agree that the LS5 MKII is a better preamp than the LS2B MKII (greater transparency, more natural and richer tonal balance, etc). However, the LS2B MKII is a much better performer than you have suggested. I maintain that in the right system it can be very satisfying and musical. Having said all of that, I still prefer the LS25 MKI with NOS 6922 to both the LS2B and the LS5 MKII |
Well I am going to disagree with all of you. I have owned a lot of ARC gear over the years including the Ref 600 Mk lll mono amps which I used with the Ref 2 Mk 2 preamp. I never thought they could ever make a better preamp. Well they did and I own it. It is their new Reference 3 whch IMO is simply the best preamp I have ever heard. It is simply magical in my system. Recently ARC did a rolling line change on the Ref 3 where they added 4 bypass caps and changed the output tube back to the 6550C. This added a more distinct bottom end to the sound and tightened up the upper end Here are some link to photos of my Ref 3 as well as my system http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vaslt&1049587927&read&3&4& http://homepage.mac.com/imacdoyou86/PhotoAlbum52.html |
