JRDG Jeff Rowland amps with Shahinian Diapason?

I had owned Diapasons for a number of years (and thought it would be my last speaker). It started by driving to the craziness my tube amp (275 wpc Equilibre) and ever since I tried a number of solid state amps. Plinius SA-102 provided marvelous misrange and silky highs but could not drive well low frequencies. I end up my search with amplifier which number of people (I believe incuding Guido) compared with Jeff Rowland 312. It is Spectron Audio Musician III. Now in 3d iteration (Mk2) is very musical in addition to having great bass and iron clad control of the Shahinians. There are a few used here on Audiogon but I saw one new or almost new with Bybees upgrade which convert it into the tube amplifier even SET) but with huge "balls"

The synergy is pure magic.

Good Luck
Simon

Hi Simon and Guido,
thanks for your input.
And how are the comparison between a Spectron and a JR 312 or Continuum 500 (or 501 + PC1). What are the differences, strengths, weeknesses of each?
Thanks
Balazs

Balazs, as you know, I do have the 312 in my system, and absolutely love it. I did enjoy the Spectron Musician 3 when I heard it 2 years ago for 3 hours in a system otherwise consisting of a slightly home-brewed CDp, HCat pre, and SP speakers. Unfortunately, I have never had the opportunity of comparing the JRDG 312 side by side with Spectron Musician 3 in the same system, so I cannot comment on specific differences.
The 501 monos and the 312 yield approximately the same authority; but the 501 monos will require a pair of PC1 devices (one per monoblock) to get closer to the nuance of the 312. . . It is worth pointing out that the 312 is a much more sophisticated design than the 501s, even though it is based around the same ICEpower 1000ASP modules. Therefore, I am not sure if 501+2xPC1 is sonically equivalent to 312. Some unconfirmed 3rd party reports indicated that the 312 still has an edge, but I have not verified the difference myself.
Continuum 500 is equivalent to a pair of 501 monoblocks, a Capri pre, a single internal PFC device equivalent to the power of 2 PC1s, and an extra bank of output capacitors not used in the 312, which are said to yield even greater authority than the 312. The performance of the C500 is said to be very good, but without having heard it side by side with the 312, I could only guess at differences. . . but guesses are not particularly valuable. DCSTEP may have had opportunities of hearing 312 and C500 side by side, and so may be much more qualified than I to comment. Guido

I've driven a set of Obelish and a set of Hawks with the JRDC Continuum 500 with great results, the C500 is a nice integrated and has stellar bass control and headroom, something the Hawks dearly needed. I now have the C500 on a set of Duevel BLDs and could not be happier.