Talk:Audio Research

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Untitled[edit]

I think McIntosh is the oldest American hi-fi maker still extant.. formed in the 50's.

I'd mention Marantz and Fisher, but those two have no operations left here in the US, and their product has been of variable quality since the dawn of the solid-state era (mid-60's.)

McIntosh still makes their stuff in the US, as does Audio Research. Both are still insanely expen$ive, with quality to match.

Audio Research Corporation was formed in 1970, iirc.

Not quite encyclopedia material but wtf.. ARC stuff tends to have very un-conventional design, with very beefy and well-regulated powersupplies, use of un-conventional phase-splitters (van syock / cross-coupled, more complex and expensive than the more common cathodyne splitter as used by hafler/dynaco but delivering a fully symmetrical signal to the output pair). ARC also prides themselves in keeping a stash of parts for their stuff, no matter when built. Their support staff alone is worth the price of admission.

I have two older ARC tube pieces (a pre and a power amp), and the build (and sound) is stunning. Built by engineers for engineers, I don't think it's very user-friendly as regards maintenance, unless the user is an out-and-out geek =o)

Okkay, i'll shutup now.. starting to sound like the rantings of a fanboi.

Tigerplish 23:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Written Like an Ad[edit]

I added the "written like an advertisement" template as I feel that the first paragraph uses a lot of praise and only one reference, a Stereophile article. Gothicman22 (talk) 12:08, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have no experience as an Editor here but have been an audiophile for 60+ years. After 30+ years of experimentation, changes and upgrades of equipment, all of my electronics have been from ARC since the early 2000's. While the first paragraph of the article may sound like an ad, it is accurate in my experience - which goes back to the late '60's. I do agree that those statements need more cites; I know where to find more and will add them as soon as I figure out how to do that - my first attempt didn't go through.

Also, there is another change of ownership pending - I will add that info too once the change is completed. Arahl1 (talk) 17:34, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The references to the receivership and ARC's financial condition are now very much out of date. I will update that information soon.Arahl1 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]