I should qualify my comments, as Blindjim does make a good point, that brings to mind others. Not only will the volume (not just area) of the room make a difference, but the amps themselves will also, of course. I'd also pay attention to the program material people are preferring as it may differ from your tastes. Though well-implemented SET amplification can serve a wide variety of music, it excels vastly with very specific music (acoustic, vocals, small ensemble, generally more simple arrangements), while other music (rock, orchestral, very dense, complex and layered music) is better served by other topologies...IMO (and I love SET). I was not using Israel's excellent 300B based amps which I've heard twice at shows with his speakers sounding wonderful in smallish hotel rooms. I used Mike Sanders' Quicksilver 300B SET amps, also known for a relatively strong bass among 300B's which are otherwise traditionally rather flabby in lower extension. Like Blum, Sanders utilizes way overbuilt transformers (each amp weighs about 38lbs). Not to say the amps are similar in other respects, but I think transformer size and quality makes a big difference in SET amps (as in other topologies as well). Blum's amps also do not give up the ghost readily in the low end from what I heard (smaller room than my own). BUT, IMO, In both cases, if the extremes in extension are critical to you, choose a different topology, like parallel SET (slightly better with more power and very similar qualities and drawbacks), or OTL (significantly better with not quite the same kind of glowing, holographic magic, but with magic of its own, and certainly a great midrange. That is assuming you like that kind of thing - In the case of SET some would point to coloration/distortion - while I'd say OTL is more linear and neutral). God help you, there's always the old reliable standby push/pull which will tend to stress the ability to handle extension well at the sacrifice of that wonderful holographic soundstage that SET does oh so well. I have not heard Push/Pull come even close to the qualities of a great SET amp, though certainly have not heard everything out there. So my comment about 300B SET + Super Eclipse III's were based upon listening nearfield in a room of moderate volume (a bit under 2000 cu ft). It is also a rather challenging room. I don't doubt that 8W can serve the SEIII's very well. I enjoyed my 300B SET amps for about six years while other amps came and went in attempts to dethrone them, so this is coming from a big fan of what that type of amp is capable of. I also am very aware of what it's not capable of, at least my amps. When you compare amps directly within the same system over many years the strengths and weaknesses become pretty clear, as they do in the amp you are comparing them to. I ultimately chose what was, for me, a more versatile amp that served a much wider range of music very well, and found in direct comparison that I actually preferred it overall. The only thing I miss about my SET amps is that incredible holographic soundstage, which I think no amp topology does quite so well as SET can. On the other hand, putting some great high-power SS amps on SEIII's will grab the bass by the barnacles and bring out nuance and control you will not hear with any SET amp, including what I did hear of Blum's amps (which, to be fair, were on Super Victory speakers in both cases which have larger bass drivers than SEIII's I believe) - you will not, however have the same soundstage and magic. Opinions will differ...that's just my .02 cents based on my own experience and preferences.
