Vandersteen 3A sigs amp advice please

Garfish, I must admit to not being familiar to the changes associated with Steve McCormack's various revisions of the original DNA series. I know that many people sing their praises. Don't get me wrong about the DNA .5/1 Deluxe or non-Deluxe. When I first heard them, I almost bought one. When you take into account price, they are a super buy. They have great bass slam which the Aleph doesn't have, very good midrange and overall very good dynamics. But to my ears they are a little rolled off in the high end when compared with an Aleph. The Aleph 4's also provide better detail, soundstaging, and excellent bass extension, if not great slam IMO. The Aleph doesn't have outstanding dynamics and is a little "suppressed" in the upper midrange. I guess I would give all these characteristics different weights than you, Craig, but I would come out with the Aleph way ahead of either the DNA .5 or 1, Deluxe or non-Deluxe. Again, I have no experience with any of the revisions by SMcAudio. Then you are comparing an amp around $2000 vs $7000 (retail prices). It ought not to be a fair comparison. Still say that the Vandersteen 3 series (particularly the 3 and 3A non-Signature) were some of the most dynamic speakers I have ever heard. They have plenty of get-up-and-go regardless of the amplifier used. You could mate them with a less dynamic amplifier. The 3A Signature, having a little bit more high end detail than the 3a(although still forgiving) could be even a better match than a 3A with the Aleph 2,4 or 1.2, given that these amps are all a little laid back in the upper mids. Kevziek: Hmmm. It is possible that I just got a bad audition of the DNA-125, but I found it to be a little lifeless. Don't remember the other electronics but the speakers where Alon 5's. Amp seemed to have a lot less slam than the earlier DNA's, but I must admit I found the Alon 5 to sound a little weird on its own. No amp that we tried seemed to straighten out the sound. So, maybe that was the fundamental problem.

I have tried VT100mk II, McCormack dna.5 deluxe. dna1, PSE Iv, Audio Research D115II, and now Vt130 and SDA1. To me, the best solid state is SDA1 in bridged mode, providing 300watts per channel. It easily beat out the mcCormack. Even PSEiv was a little better. It was just sweeter. But, the best match overall was the Vt130. It makes the VT100II sound ...well not so exciting and like a solid stage. vt130 has so much more emotions.

A footnote to the McCormack/Vandersteen banter.. Richard Vandersteen used the McCormack amps (DNA 1's I believe) at shows for quite a while. Don't know what they use now. As a former DNA1 Deluxe owner, I'm not sure if this is the best match possible with the Vandy's. Both products are on the laid back side IMO. I would agree with the Audio Research VT100 MkII as I have heard both the 2 Sig's and 3 Sig's with this amp. The D series amps would also be an interesting choice and the higher powered versions make swell space heaters. You can camp out around them during the winter months.

Kevziek; glad to hear that you're enjoying your McCormack amp. I haven't heard it, but would like too. Rayhall, to put the McCormack DNA-2DX into perspective versus some of the excellent Pass Alephs, the 2DX retailed for $5K, and is a true dual-mono design with 300/600 wpc into 8 and 4 ohms. This amp did not get a lot of attention because it was never reviewed by STPH or TAS, and also the company was going under during its production run, ie I have one made in CA. and one in Va. The 2DX truly is a great sounding amp, and different but very competive with any amp in its price range and above, IMO, eg I liked it much better than the ML 331-- more natural. I've discussed this amp at length with Steve McCormack, and am planning on putting another $4K into upgrading it to Rev. A Gold+. BTW, the DNA2 is truly a great buy used at $2 to 2.5K. Cheers. Craig