2. misc-audio
  3. 168457-1565

Puritan PMS 156 vs. Audioquest Niagara 3000

Has anyone compared these to conditioners to each other?  I would be using them for my front end and 150 watt solid state mono block amps.  I can kind of get a feel via some of the reviews but was looking for a direct comparison on the sound signature.  Hoping to achieve a lower noise floor without restricting the dynamics or existing tone signature.  Thanks.   
goose
goose OP
669 posts
 
tvad, thanks for your input, I think they are both excellent but it's hard to tell without a direct comparison.
  
Post removed 
goose OP
669 posts
 
Yep a direct comparison which is helpful....any others? 
hilde45's avatar
hilde45
4,796 posts
 
A direct comparison...with their gear, in their room (not yours)...seems useful to you, why? On what basis do you think that the difference they hear will somehow transcend those differences in gear, room -- let alone taste, physiology of hearing, etc.

This may seem like a snarky question, but I don't mean it to be. I've wondered about these conditioners before and after reading various posts it occurred to me that there'd be no way for me to know without trying them myself. That's why I wonder why you're hopeful you'll learn something with this question.
twoleftears's avatar
twoleftears
5,313 posts
 
Can't you get the two units for an in-home trial?  I'm sure you can get the Niagara; try and find a dealer (Puritan have an increasing US network) willing to let you try one.

As I've posted elsewhere, I found that the PSM 156 bested a Niagara 1000 and an Isotek Sigmas EVO3, among several other units.
More to discover