Krell 400xi vs. BAT VK-300x vs. McIntosh MA6900

I agree with Jeffjarvis. I had a 6900 and switched to the MA2275. Didn't need the extra power of the former and much preferred the tube sound of the latter.
Good luck.

Dave your comments are simply foolishness; I have owned my share of amps the past few years and the couple Mac pieces I have used are not as you'd have us believe. I will agree that Mac floundered through the 80's and a good share of the 90's, but not so these days, IMO. Also, just because Wilson uses ARC and Krell, per you, doesn't mean they are the best and/or the only products one should use with Wilson speakers.

I owned both 400xi and mc 2275. Both are great. Krell has great base and detail but slightly dry sounding. Mac is much fuller sounding and the autoformer does a lot for the base for a tube amp. Overall prefer mcintosh for its timbre.

How about the Pathos Logos? Is this Integrated a contender in this group? Is it worth considering at $4,800-new, or a bit too esoteric/audio jewelry as an Italian Hi-Fi piece?

The krell 400xi is killer good when broken in and cabled properly...mate it to a 6-8ohm speaker of musical heritage and it don't much better at any price, including my former $40K evo rig!! Mcintosh' just doesn't get out of the way of the music...it inflicts a significant signature over the sound. A signature that is not anywhere near state of the art! Martin Colloms would tend to agree since he pulls no punches either. My Mcintosh 501's and C46 were very old school sound...the tube pre was even worse. The parts from the 1960's for heavens sake..anyway, enjoy!!