Pass Labs Amp X350.5 or X350.8 anyone compare?

I sense as well that the XA-160.8s have mostly settled in by 75 hours. I can see how some might perceive the .8 palette as slightly dark or tilted down. However this is deceptive, as there is also ginormous resolving power in the treble and upper mid-range, that emerges without over-emphasis from the most surreal black background that I've encountered in an amplifier. I'm still getting used to it, and am not yet persuaded whether the effect is entirely natural or subtractive. But the attendant absence of distortion, ringing, grain, and glare is definitely a good thing, and the system has never sounded so smooth and seductive.

Hmmm...I'll have to say I don't like a subdued upper midrange and treble. If that's the case with these .8 amps, I'm no longer interested in them.

Dave, I did not get the impression of a "subdued upper midrange and treble" when I compared the XA160.8 to the XA160.5 in Madfloyd's system. He has Pass XP30 and Wilson Alexias.

Dave 72, I wouldn't say the midrange and treble is subdued. Its just different from what I have been listening to over the past several years. To go from the front row to perhaps the middle is the difference in my opinion,

When I first upgraded from XA160.5's to XA160.8's I did think the highs were subdued. So did at least one of my audiophile friends, who told me he preferred the highs from the .5's but overall preferred the .8's because it had more 'meat on the bones'.

There was a LOT more bass energy in the .8's and this finds it way up into the midrange where it provides a thicker, more palpable presentation.

It's hard to say whether the treble of the .8's actually has less energy or whether the .5's simply have a thinner (more recessed) midrange. The latter is the impression one gets when going back from the .8's to the .5's (I had both amps in my system for 2 months).

I ended up switching speaker cables and now I don't find any loss in high frequencies (system synergy!).

Hope this helps.