Thoress full-function vs Coincident CSLS/CSPS

Hi @pauly, I’m familiar with the website you mention. I have a CSLS in my system, so I know that side of the equation! 
@sns thanks for chiming in! I already have a CSLS, so the question I’m trying to answer whether Thoress is a lateral move or an upgrade. I’m very happy with CSLS, but the idea of one box solution is tempting.

I believe that the German Thoress is a top notch manufacturer of excellent tube electronics. You never know for certain until you hear a product or better yet do a direct comparison between two competing components.

I seriously doubt that the Thoress preamplifier would outperform the CSLS. I own the CSLS and had the opportunity to hear more expensive excellent preamplifier/line stages. All truly terrific but not better than the CSLS. It does consist of two heavy chassis /boxes and umbilical cable and takes up space.
you 
Four boxes if you add the phono stage. So I understand the desire for a smaller (Neater?) 1 chassis solution. In terms of sound quality I just believe that it will not be easy to beat it. The CSLS is a superb unit.
Charles

Get a VAC much better then both had Thoress lousy service dumped it.

A good friend had the VAC Signature MK II for about  5 years and it is excellent and one of the "more expensive " preamplifiers I was referring to above. I listened to It many times during his ownership. I’ve heard It paired with my 300b SET mono blocks, beautiful pairing.

However It is not better sounding than the Coincident Statement Line Stage. Both have stellar drive, dynamics, musical flow and pace. Both are excellent across the board. The CSLS is more transparent and pure in my opinion. Could be 6SN7 character versus 101D character. Music lovers would be ecstatic to have either in their audio system.
Charles

Addendum,
I may be incorrect regarding the signal tubes in the VAC Signature MK II Line Stage but I know they were not 4 pin DHT such as the 101D. Again you could not possibly go wrong with either Line stage.
Charles