First Sound Presence mk11 vs Audio Research L.S.25

Which iteration of the First Sound preamps did Paul design?

Based on what Emmanuel has explained to me, this is what I understand to be
true:

Emmanuel commissioned Paul Weitzel for a schematic of a tube preamp
circuit--a very basic class A triode with a tube regulator on the B+.
Emmanuel, in collaboration with several others (not including Paul) designed
the First Sound preamp in 1991. The first unit was sold in the fall of 1991.

Since then, there has been a tremendous amount of R & D to raise the
performance of the preamp to its current level. Credit for that, and for voicing
of the preamp, belongs solely to Emmanuel Go.

If this is the case, I think it is a bit misleading to give Paul Weitzel credit for
the "design" of the First Sound.

I auditioned the ARC Ref 1 MkII for three days in my system right next to my First Sound 4.0 (it is now upgraded to the 4.0 with Paramount Plus upgrade). I have heard that the LS-25 and Ref 1 are quite similar.

Both the FS and ARC pre-amps are very good. Aside from the ARC's features like a remote control, balanced connections, and a phase switch, etc., the sound stage is slightly larger with the ARC, and the ARC's midrange and upper mid's seem slightly more prominent compared the First Sound 4.0. The idle state noise floor (no music playing) is noticeably higher with the ARC, and the noise floor with music playing is also higher with the ARC. It is as if the ARC preamp has to amplify the signal to get the music to propagate above a subtle electronic haze. You get good music but is seems processed by comparison to the FS.

With the First Sound 4.0 (which is considerably cheaper than the ARC Ref 1), the signal just seems to be allowed to flow out with less electronic interference. The music does not need to be amplified above an ambient noise floor. The noise floor is already kept low. The listener gets the "picture" of the forest glade, for example, with less ground mist from which everything emerges. You "see" the trees and their trunks, etc. fairly clearly through the First Sound. With the ARC, under the same analogy, it is as if the trees have to be made taller and their branches bigger in order to present the same picture above greater ground mist.

Now, the FS 4.0 with the Paramount Plus upgrade is a much closer contender to the Ref 1 in terms of price. The sound stage is larger and more fleshed out with the P Plus upgrade compared to the straight FS 4.0. Since I have not revisited the Ref 1 since the P Plus upgrade, I can't comment any further on differences.

Hope this helps. I you can at all swing moving up from the Presence Deluxe Mk II to at least the 4.0 or higher, you will be rewarded with more of the same First Sound strengths.

Of course, you can run super long interconnects to power amps with the ARC---which may be tricky with the FS (don't know, maybe we should ask Emmanuel Go about this…), and you can use XLR anywhere you want and you get a remote control. Both pre's are musical and enjoyable. Hope this helps.

Huge caveat I forgot to mention: I did all of my listening to the ARC Ref 1 with RCA/unbalanced connections. I have been assured that the Ref 1's performance is much better through XLR/balanced cables than unbalanced ones.

I did not check the Ref 1 using XLR up against a FS 4.0 using RCA cables. It would be interesting to find out, though....

Drubin: There may be more to the story than what you have been told ...

Never the less, the First Sound is quite good and would be my first choice if the wonderful TRL GTP-3 or GTP-4 wasn't available.

Cheers!
Jack Seaton