Well, I've located a new-in-the-box McCormack DNA-1 (standard) and Sonic Frontiers Line 1 at what are essentially used prices. Hard to pass up, especially since they have the full factory warranties intact (I'm a worry wart about these things, so will enjoy the added comfort). They're also a local purchase (more comfort). SMc said the amp was made just before the company moved to VA, so not only is it a late model, it's also a *real* McCormack amp (for what that's worth). Getting these so cheaply means upgrading the amp to Revision A (and possibly beyond; SMc says they have some new options available) will be a definite near-term option. Hopefully that will take care of any short comings compared to the standard DNA-0.5. ;-) Ultimately, if I don't like the DNA-1 I can always sell it and "downgrade" to a 0.5. Or two. ;-) ;-) Thanks for the feedback, guys.
Bryston vs. McCormack
After deciding first on the Magnepan 1.6QR, then the Vandersteen 2ce Signature, I auditioned the Revelation 3 at length this weekend and bought a pair. They sounded that good to my ear. A Bryston 3B-ST was the amp of choice for the Maggies and Vandesteens, but the Hales are a different animal. Which would be a better match for the Hales: A Bryston 3B-ST or a McCormack DNA-0.5 or DNA-1? The only other part of the system already purchased is a CAL Alpha/Delta DAC-transport combination. For the pre-amp I've been leaning toward tubes, but mostly to tame the Bryston's (perceived) upper end brilliance or add a little focus for the Vandersteens. The overall characteristics of the Hales' is very close to the right sound: tight bass; not overly emphasized mid-range or treble, but not laid back, either; good timbre; smooth vocals. Which of these amps is going to lend the least amount of color to this sound? Also, any comments about putting a tube top-end into this system?
- ...
- 16 posts total
- 16 posts total