Anyone listen to Zu Audio's Definition Mk3?

After all my trials and tribulations with amps, I've settled on Quads II 40s. They have an excellent balance of dynamics, air, and tone.

They are also the most inexpensive pair of amps I've had in my system. Go figure.

It`s no shock that the Quad II amp outperformed more expensive amplifiers. IMO there`s a relatively weak correlation between cost and performance with a lot of current 'high end' components. The adage "you get what you pay for" has more than a few exceptons in this genre.I`m glad you trust your ears.
Regards,

In the last few months, three Zu owners have converted from tubes to ASR favorable results. Keith, you should consider that as an option if the Quads don't float your boat long term.

Dad,

What high $$$ amps have you heard to write such things?

Glory,
It`s not just amplifiers, I`m referring to audio components in general. I don`t believe more money spent = better sound all the time.Developing a good home audio system requires thought,patience, careful matching and trial and error experience. Just simply buying more expensive components won`t always yield the better result,as Keithr has realized. I and I`m sure others have come to reconize this point. Spending more money certainly can result in improved performance,it just is`nt a guarantee.

Just a quick personal example, I`ve own a Symphonic Line amplifier and a 100 watt PP tube amp. Both were actually very good. My current amplifier is less expensive yet is much superior in sound,not even close.

Obviously we all have different experiences and conclusions with these subjective matters.If price and performance were that strongly related then simply buying the most costly gear you could afford would get the best sound. It does`nt work that way(not very often).To be clear I`m not dismissing the cost of better quality components,just saying it is`nt the only variable involved.
Regards,