Hi (again) Fpeel; I thought AJ made the case for tubes very well also, and I've tried a comparably priced tube amp; the midrange and highs were beautiful, but the bass, although deep, was so slow, bloated, and boomy that I knew it was not for me. I listen to a lot of populat, mid-bass heavy music (blues, soul, rock, pop etc), and good bass control is essential to me. I've personally found that a good tubed pre-amp with a good solid state amp is the way to go. I have nothing against good tube equipment. You've made a good choice. Enjoy. Craig
Bryston vs. McCormack
After deciding first on the Magnepan 1.6QR, then the Vandersteen 2ce Signature, I auditioned the Revelation 3 at length this weekend and bought a pair. They sounded that good to my ear. A Bryston 3B-ST was the amp of choice for the Maggies and Vandesteens, but the Hales are a different animal. Which would be a better match for the Hales: A Bryston 3B-ST or a McCormack DNA-0.5 or DNA-1? The only other part of the system already purchased is a CAL Alpha/Delta DAC-transport combination. For the pre-amp I've been leaning toward tubes, but mostly to tame the Bryston's (perceived) upper end brilliance or add a little focus for the Vandersteens. The overall characteristics of the Hales' is very close to the right sound: tight bass; not overly emphasized mid-range or treble, but not laid back, either; good timbre; smooth vocals. Which of these amps is going to lend the least amount of color to this sound? Also, any comments about putting a tube top-end into this system?
- ...
- 16 posts total
- 16 posts total

