PS: Typical McGowan Sound? -- HCA-2 & Classic 250


The commentary I have read on the HCA-2 has been mixed, but the criticisms I read remind me of the typical criticisms that have been expressed on all of Paul McGowan's designs in the past: An upfront, technicolor upper midrange & lower treble, some harmonic thinness, & a tight, but lean bass.

I'd sooner believe the review on Audiogon than I would KR's review in Stereophile, whose questionable hearing I don't trust.

In looking at the responses to the Audiogon review, it is interesting to see that half the responders love it; the other half hate it. By seeing all of them for sale on 'Gon now, you wonder what the real scoop is.

I'm kind of interested in the CLASSIC 250, which is a non-digital design that has alot of hoopla about it on the PS website. Has anyone heard or bought this amp, or compared it to the HCA-2?
kevziek
Fully acknowledging that a 30-day trial is a great opportunity to listen for myself.....

I really had to scratch my head when reading the Stereophile review of this amp too. If a $1700, 150 watt/ch amp is rated Class A and is seen as driving a pair of expensive, reference speakers in a manner comensurate with the Class A rating for an experienced listener, and does so with suspect meeasurements, and none of this is questionable, then a bunch of people have wasted a bunch of money on more expensive amps. This, indeed, may be the case - Class D amps may truly be the future.

Yes, there's no substitute for listening for ones self, and yes, measurements don't begin to tell the whole story, but there's certainly enough here to warrant a comment / thread without it having to be seen as a subtle slam on a manufacturer.
Please note the Rowland new amp the 301 is based on some
variation of Class D amplification. What does that tell you???
A psychologist could make a career and a fortune out of studying audiophiles behaviour! It is sad that egos and simply people's need for approval are the motivation for the majority of online reviews (and maybe profesional reviews [ST !!!]), as any person can appreciate when reading audioreview.com write-ups! I feel that one has no credibility as a critic if they cannot evaluate the flaws of the equiptment along with the virtues, and also have an extensive resume of previous components used. For many reviews there is nothing but glowing remarks of equiptment they own, especially so from folks who recently moved from low-fi receiver land to seperates, or cheaper anything on up to mid priced gear, as is often the case with highly reviewed budget components, and then folks really feel they own the best they can afford, regardless of their limited experience, where you typically see phrases like:

"Best for under X grand"
"Beats products costing X times as much".

and so on with no basis in reality! Funny as heck to read but sad that many people can't see through the BS.
And since we are talking about the HCA-2, anyone else really disturbed by the claims stating that a $500-$2000 power cord is absolutely required to make this amp sound good!
How right. Does Sam Tellig review anything that isn't great? You can't trust the reviewers. I don't mean to disparage this amp -- I'm sure it has its good qualities, but I, for one, cannot overlook the very strong negative comments, or the glaringly bad lab results.

I'll have to look it up, but I believe the Bel Canto evo amp, which is Class D as well, did not measure so badly as the PS did. Even Stereophile's reviewer did say it was fuller, warmer, less upfront sounding, and actually he said, in its 2nd generation, it was on the same playing field as the HCA-2. So, why isn't everyone raving about it?