joule electra vs. atma-sphere any input?


does anyone have any experience with both of these amps. I am interested in the rights of passage or the atmasphere ma2 mark 3's. What are the sonic differences, build quality, reliability etc... Any help would be much appreciated
billyg1
I owned a pair of MA-2's MKII. I found the amps, within this specific system, to be articulate, detailed with great bass. The Joules Rites, which I have now, and to iterate within this system, have a bit more body, density with nearly the equal in delineation.
These are two of my favorite amps, especially amongst tubes, with great imaging, staging, frequency extension; and no exaggeration in the midbass through the midrange.
I have had absolutely no mechanical problems with either set of amps.
Some opinions may side towards the Atma Sphere if balanced connections are used. With the A-S preamp, balanced out's offered a more musical, yet detailed presentation. With the preamp I now have, modified Jadis, the Joule in single-ended is just supurb. Some of the best music I have ever gotten out of an audio system.
As usual, individual tastes and component match-ups should be the determining factors.
I own a pair of Atma-Sphere MA-1s, and they are the best amps I have had in my system. Very clear and uncolored. They do not sound tubey in the sense of adding any euphonic colorations. I have heard the Joule amps only at CES, in a system with Vandersteen sepakers. I don't know the model, but they were on the myrtle wood bases, and they were big. The system sounded very good. It had what I consider to be a classic tube sound - very rich harmonics, perhaps a bit rolled off at the top. Very pleasant to listen to, but I believe the harmonic richness was a result of euphonic harmonic distortion from the tubes. Of course it's hard to say without putting the two in the same system,and it's hard to say what else was contributing to the sound, but I think that richness is distinctively tube. (I'm sure they were using a Joule preamp, since it was a JOule booth, but I don't remember the source).
Based on this experience, I would have to agree with Siddh, that the Joules would provide a richer sound. I don't mean this to put the Joules down; I remember the system as sounding very good, with the classic tube richness.
Based on my experience with products slightly lower down the food chain from these two manufacturers, i would agree with what's been said. My M-60s have better attack and are more dynamic than my VZN-80, but the Joule has better imaging, more harmonic richness and a bit more three dimensionality or "palbability" to use some a-phile jargon. With a bit quicker cabling now, I like the Joule but it will depend, I am quite sure, on personal preference. These are not chocolate vs vanilla differences, but more vanilla vs french vanilla. Subtle but easily discernible in a resolving system. You cannot go wrong with either, IMO.
The Atma-Spheres were MA2 MkII.2. I believe this thread, as many threads, requires a reminder of how critical component matching is. Everything from cabling, isolation, individual pieces of equipment, tubes within those pieces of equipment, and of course, room acoustics.
Every system I have put together has changed by some degree when introducing a new variable. Some for better, some not. This does not preclude the character of any individual piece of equipment. An example can be drawn from the recent upgrade of the tonearm on my table. It has taken the entire presentation in a different direction. One, thankfully, I am most impressed with.
In an attempt to avoid a too didactic stance, let me add that both of these amplifiers, as are others I have owned, great makers of music.