MF Tri Vista or Nu Vista Amp or Pathos Logos

the musical fidelity newer equipment is excellent for the money involved, but the older i believe sounds somewhat better overall. the pricing of the new makes it very good for anyone wanting new equipment with a warrant and wanting that type of situatio. i can give you the email of a person who has some new vista product in box that was never used and you can buy it very reasonable. the deceased owned the equipment and they are selling off estate....

I haven't heard the Nu-vista amp but I have the Nu-vista CDP. Still one of the best made in its class. I do own the Tri-Vista amp and it's terrific. I tested a lot of very fine amps in my search, including the McIntosh 6900, the BAT VK-300, Krell 400xi, AVI, Gryphon 9100, Plinius 9200, Manley Stingray, and the Pathos Logos, as well as a few others. I didn't like the Pathos, but I did like the rest. However, I thought the Tri-Vista beat them all. One of the best values in that group was the AVI. The Manley, McIntosh and BAT were also highly impressive. I directly compared the BAT to the Pathos and it was no contest. The BAT was much much better.

I've got a NuVista 300 amp and I've never had hum problems through the speakers or with the amp itself. It is a great amp if you can find one.

Thanks for the responses.
Second hand Nu Vista goes for around 500$ cheeper than Tri Vista but on the other hand is 1-2 years older.
I need to decide which one to go for.
Recently auditioned KW500 and was disapointed.
A308 pre/power combo sounded better in the same system.
Warmer and smoother.
So it will be either Nu Vista or Tri Vista.

Ever tried Accuphase?
Accuphase produces some of the best integrateds in the world, for the price you pay for Nu-V or Tri-V, you can get an Accuphase E-407/408, or even stretch a little bit to get the E-530.