Experience with Moon by Simaudio amps & preamps

jerryg123 - Thanks for sharing you experience.  Interesting how the decision I didn't articulate keeps coming up.  Go full tubes with Audio Research or transition to solid state.  Very helpful input.  

arcticdeth - I appreciate your brevity and enthusiam.

Moon harsh? First time I have ever heard those two words in the same sentence when discussing Simaudio.

Yea, my experiences with owning Simaudio also wouldn't have me consider it harsh or bright.
I personally would use the term very detailed and potentially forward compared to some other brands based on the pieces I've owned.

I owned a 600i integrated and thought it was amazing; I found it very detailed, but sweet and smooth.   I then purchased Magico S1s and found I wanted a little more power plus a little warmth so went to a Pass Labs X250.8 + Pass Preamp.   I found I lost some resolution compared to 600i (but did gain power and warmth) so switched to a SimAudio 740P preamp and it paired with the Pass amp was excellent; my system was very detailed again with a massive soundstage and still that hint of warmth from the big Pass.   

I've also owned a 380DSD DAC and I found that not as detailed/forward sounding as a Berkeley and a Bricasti, a more organic meat on the bones type of sound.

I personally think Moon would be generally a great match for Sonus Faber speakers; I could see where some folks may find it too forward with the ultra detailed loudspeakers, but to me that is a matter of taste.   My high resolution Magicos didn't reveal any harshness to my ears with my 600i and I still own the 740P.

Cheers

@ddafoe Thanks for sharing.

Perhaps I should have asked if the Moon sound was ever fatiguing - I enjoyed the sound and its much more detailed than my McIntosh gear. 

Although I didn’t own the Nova V, I had the pleasure of owning Olympica 3s last year. I agree with ghdprentice that they are a superb match with ARC. Another contender is Luxman 590AXII. It has the sweet class A sound but enough juice to drive the hell out of those woofers. 

Perhaps I should explain my use if the word harsh in conjunction with the Moon. I chose the wrong word… I just should have said analytical / details highlighted. It was not fatiguing at all. Fatigue is caused by copious quantities of distortion and noise. I am talking about very high end gear here… so the degree is small. The sound was very detailed but a touch analytical in the upper reaches, with good space in the soundstage between images. The overall impression of each sound is natural, but less so on the edges and particularly to me when taken together. I found the treble to not be as pure and sweet as the real thing and definitely a bit forward. This to me is a bit hard (better word than harsh)… I am very sensitive to this. The leanness in the midrange did not help offset this. This was complemented by a similar leanness in the Pass. But these are the things that can be seen as small but add up to the overall gestalt of a system.

So while the differences in details can be small the overall result can be large and easily discernible. I can tell a Mac system within a few seconds… lack of detail, good midrange and a preponderance of bass. An Audio Research system, highly detailed, well defined and articulated bass, rich midrange boom… details not glaring. By process of elimination (if I knew there were these three systems as a possibility) I could within 30 seconds determine which was the Sim system… highly detailed, balanced across the spectrum, natural sounding, quiet background, but with details highlighted a bit. The Sim would be a bit harder to pick out as it sounds a bit like a number of good high end solid state manufacturers. 

All of these companies produce outstanding products. Each with there own character. The important thing is to match your own tastes to the appropriate company.