At a shop in Vancouver, BC, I spent some time with the CDP/pre-amp combined on one chassis (called CD-24 [?]) and the new Tri-Vista integrated. This fed a pair of Sonus Farber Homage floor standers and a sub. Apparently, the Tri-Vista amp was new--and it did not sound good--but the dealer did not tell me about its lack of break in at the time.
Two weeks later, the same amp sounded much better: smoother, able to handle crescendos, less brittle, stage depth opened up, more musical. The CDP this time was the matching Tri-Vista CDP. Cabling: Pierre Girard (sp?) IC, and Harmonic Tech Pro-9 plus speaker wire. The total cost converted to$USD for power cords, stand, cabling, sub (?) everything was $34k.
Sound: Good, but nothing special. A lot of money for rather mediocre performance. I would like to take the Tri-Vista CDP home for an audition sometime--the amp as well. For some reason, the combination of gear just sounded kind of flat and boring without much detail or refinement. It was not a matter of HiFi vs. emotional involvement either. The system as configured did neither well.
For a full half that $34k, I have heard systems that do everything better: more life like over all, cover the HiFi bases better (imaging, s staging, details, frequency extension, etc.), and are far more interesting to listen to on a pure musical/emotional engagement level.
This only means that better system integration; a better setup (stand?) or improving room acoustics could solve much of the sound--for all I know. Sometimes, far humbler systems well set-up sound better than higher-end ones in poor conditions.
As heard, I would consider that system a poor use of funds. With time and careful tuning, it could perhaps play like Nadia Solerno-Sonnenberg: with soul, passion, eminently serving the music. Who knows?
