Rogue CM II v Rogue CM III

@geph0007 I owned the Cronus Magnum II a few years ago. My issue with that model was that it sounded more like a solid state amp than a tube amp. It had a ton of power, clarity, detail, and definitely had the holographic imaging that tubes are known for. But I never felt like I was listening to tubes. I sold it to another audiophile friend. He later sent the unit to Rogue to be upgraded to CM III. I went to listen to the upgraded amp at his home and couldn't believe the difference. The CM III had a nice euphonic and lush (comparatively speaking) sound that I never experienced earlier with the CM II, and it sounded more refined as well.

So my experience tells me that the CM III is vastly improved over the II. But take it with a grain of salt since I never compared the two in my system at the same time. That being said, it still leans more in the direction of SS -- i.e. it is still brighter and less lush than a typical tube amp specimen. This is not necessarily a bad thing though.

Sounds like we are hearing the same differences.    You did say vast improvement which is true  if one wanted to go further into the classic tube sound .   I think one can go to far in some systems  based on other components. In other words to much of a good thing .  I prefer to think of them as different.

be careful with speaker sensitivity.  i had a cmii with kt 120 tubes that could drive most speakers quite well.  

the CM iii ships with kt88 tubes and i would not use it with speakers less than 89 db or so. 

The CM III comes with KT 120s  The CM I came with KT88s  I have gone back and forth many times.  Tired of moving them in and out.   In my system the II fits better  The  III is more traditional tube sound , warmer more lush but also seems somewhat laid back and  slower then the II.  Maybe slightly more depth and separation in the III.   Slightly  more attack and bite on electric guitars with the II in my system.   If I was in to classical music the III may be the ticket.  Your mileage will vary.