John - I understand the hierarchy and costs of the varying tube vs. ss, and stereo vs. mono amps here, but this does not address my initial point and that of Semi: if the VK-600SE (2-channel version) sells less than the pair of 150SE's, and if there is no sonic difference between these models, then what is the benefit of the mono 150SE's? Why does anyone want to pay $4k more for a less powerful and higher maintenance pair of tube amps? The VK-600MSE (mono amps) are not at all relevant to the discussion at this point.
You stated that RH in TAS reported, "they claim that the VK-600SE and the VK-150SE's sonic signature are identical". Does this imply that there is no benefit from tubes AND there is also no benefit from mono amps? This is a mighty tough claim to believe.
I wish the comparison had been between the 75SE vs. the 600SE OR perhaps the 150SE vs. the 600MSE. This at least reduces the change to simply tube vs. ss and of course the benefits of the higher power provided by the ss.
John
You stated that RH in TAS reported, "they claim that the VK-600SE and the VK-150SE's sonic signature are identical". Does this imply that there is no benefit from tubes AND there is also no benefit from mono amps? This is a mighty tough claim to believe.
I wish the comparison had been between the 75SE vs. the 600SE OR perhaps the 150SE vs. the 600MSE. This at least reduces the change to simply tube vs. ss and of course the benefits of the higher power provided by the ss.
John