Audio Research vs Burmester Audio

Dev, I've had the Anats for a little over a year. They are set up in a 32 x 14 foot livingroom, and their placement had to be accomodated to the other uses of the room. Neither their location nor the room itself are optimal, but we are getting surprisingly realistic sound nevertheless. Use of wall acoustic panels or other obtrusive sound devices was ruled out by my wife, but I do use ten Acoustic Resonators, which help. The left speaker only has a back wall. Instead of a side wall, there is a large opening into another room. That results in the right speaker having a greater volume than the left. I've solved that problem by using the balance control of the Krell preamp. Only a modest two clicks (or one db)increase to the left speaker balances the sound without destroying the sound stage. As to the Burmester 909s: I've heard that they are very good, but they are also quite expensive. But I've never heard them. There are a couple of Burmester dealers in NYC, but none in the Boston area, where I live.

Toffen -- while I cannot advise about the AR phono vs a Burmester phono. For the pre & amp combos (ref3 + 600 vs 011/808 + 909): the AR, which I like, is no match for the Burmester.
OTOH, the Burmester is also more expensive (I think).

Gregm, when you make reference to the AR Ref3 & 600's vs Burmester 011 & 909 saying the AR is no match for the Burmester. Can you go into further detail why.

What did the rest of the system consist of to give you this you out come.

Have you heard the 909 and compared it to the most recent 911 MKIII, any thoughts.

Dev -- I *don't think* i've compared 909 to the latest 911 -- but the 911 current until the beginning of this year?

With a number of speakers, average sensitivity or better, (medium acapella, a-physic, wilson sophia, wilson maxx)the 911 gave a slightly more euphonic sound than the 909; sweeter rather than neutral. Admittedly pleasant.
It's just that the 909, with the Maxx for example, seemed to give more immediacy to the sound. I.e. the transient attack thing...
Although in all fairness, I can't say I was complaining with the 911 -- and really, it was only obvious with the Maxx which is a big spkr after all, huge cubic capacity.

The AR & the Burm. There was a Burmester integrated cdp (001?) & a S Yorke TT (don't remember the cartridge) & the ASR phono which didn't thrill me was used. Speaker wires were commendably thick, intercons were Nordost. Speakers were a newish pair of Wilson Maxx.
Well, to put it simply, the Burmester sounded clear and the AR did not. That is, in comparison to one another. There was also a small matter of soft dynamics with AR vs. considerably more attack with the Burm. Please note that "clear" does not mean harsh, etc, i.e. an edge around 6-9kHz exemplifying mock "clarity". And/or cutting of anything below 80 Hz by at least 3dB so that the rest sounds better...
I can't say if it was a pre or power amp matter, as no one thought of mixing around the combos. Stupid of us.
The spkrs were, reputedly, new-ish, as were all the electronics -- i.e. there was no known problem with the AR tubes, the standard ones being the ones used. (You'll have noticed that the Burmester pre used was not their super-duper model which was deemed outrageously expensive. Pity.)
We had some commendably thick spkr wires & exotic Nordost intercons.

Of course, the AR combo makes many others sound UNclear accordingly. Please don't read the above out of its limited perspective! Regards

I have had a Burmester 089 CDP/DAC/Pre for several months now, and just picked up a 911 MK3, and I am blown away by sound of this combination. It is totally transparent, dynamic, detailed and the most analog sounding SS match I have ever heard, ever. This is with Venture CR-8 Signature speakers and FMS cables.There is a audio God, and He has blessed me.