Puritan PSM156

@twoleftears 

I forgot to put in my post how indifferent Brian Tucker was to my feedback as he told me I was welcomed to post my opinion on Audiogon's forum which I did today. 

Thanks for the Audio Circle suggestion.

Receivers aren’t exactly known for being audiophile level cleanness of signal, no matter what the brand. What’s your amp @merlin66? Your systems components, as good as they are in their lane, just arent inherently clean enough to show the difference, as there are many users with much more $$/cleaner-signaled systems that are very happy with this product..
You’re probably audio and video in one system, and video is another big source of noise for clean and quiet hifi. Try separating a pathway for stereo music listening only with a good quality, quiet 2ch preamp (tubed if your so inclined) with HT bypass function and a separate stereo amp for front L & R... But the Puritan 156 is fitting into 50k+ systems. 

I concur, that perhaps merlin66's system is not resolving enough for the Puritan 156 to yield results.  I am using it in my system with rhe new Puritan XXS power cord and the results are quite good!

@jriggy I just purchased Puritan as well. Would my system be resolving enough??

*New McIntosh C8/Mcintosh MA6600(used as power amp), Lumin T2, Rega P8, Focal Kanta No.2

@justjames72 McIntosh separates are certainly considered more ‘hi-fi’ than a HT receiver. And over $10k in separates would generally be though of to out perform a $2k all-in-one, so class and price-point would say yes, but I don’t know. All I know is the 156 is beating out a few of the top $5k+ conditioners for more than a few owners with over $50k systems... Its just not fair to bash a distributor when/if a piece doesn’t work well in your system, when there are to many other variables to consider.