Anyone compare VAC Phi 300.1 to VTL 450's.

I've owned both amps and the 300.1 is better but again it cost more so it should be. My 450 was only a sig not series II. I had the 300.1 and the Lamm 1.2 ref and I thought the 300.1 was better also. I could not get over how good the midrange was and the 300.1 had amazing bass for a tube amp. But none of these amps had bass like the Levinson 33H.

Actually the price of the 300.1 in monoblock fashion is in the price range of the big 600 watt VTL monoblocks. They look like space heaters. Do you know what changes were made from the 300 to 300.1. Also I have heard the VTL 450 and thought the bass was good but not the tightest. I also thought there was a slight glare in the upper mids. My thinking is that the 300.1 will have tighter bass, less glare and grain in the upper mids, and probably a fuller midrange without being heavy or dark.

Jwm describes my experiences with the 300.1 in his last sentence...well put.

I would like to amend something I wrote previously.

(However, the VAC is also one of the hottest running amps I have ever known as well. It put out at least as much heat as the VTL, and more than both Lamm monoblocks put together.)

I have recently purchased a VAC Phi 300.1 amplifier to replace the Lamm M2.1 monoblocks.  The VAC does run very warm, but not as much as both Lamm M2.1 monoblocks.  I attribute my error to the fact that we were in my friend's listening room doing an A/B comparison between the Lamms and the VAC, and the room was pretty hot (much hotter than usual) with both amps on, and they had been on for a few hours.  I erroneously attributed this primarily to the VAC when I should have attributed it to the Lamms.

I will also point out that the bass response of the VAC is the equal of the Lamm M2.1s, (although it may not be the equal of my friend's M2.2s).

So far my enthusiasm for the the VAC 300.1 amplifier has only grown now that I own one!