Classe ca-2100 vs ca-2300

I'll answer my own question in case someone else has this decision to make sometime. I traded up to the CA-2300 and boy am I happy I did. The CA-2100 is good amp that gave me hours of pleasure but the CA-2300 is just better in every respect.

The CA-2300 also soundly beats the formidable CA-2200. I just made the switch after three years with the 2200 and there's no contest...this amp got some good reviews but deserves more press. If you can't afford the M600 monos, it's the way to go at 600 wpc into 4ohms.

The circuit topology is the same for all three amps. The improvement you hear is due to having extra power.

Aball,

You've owned and listened to a lot of equipment. I am not an electrical
engineer nor am I a designer. While I don't disagree that power is a
primary difference among the amplifiers discussed here, it is not the *only*
difference. My experience listening tells me that *everything* in an amplifier
affects the sound. A number of highly qualified designers claim this as well.

There are a number of elements in the amplifiers that are not identical and
this results in differences I hear that can be traced to a variety of sources.
For example, the approach used with regard to fuses in the 2200 and the
2300 is distinctly different. The amplifier's components are not identical and
I am sure the designers at Classe would concur with my assertion that the
new line does more than merely provide extra watts. Reviews of the old
Delta Monoblocs and the new M600's would certainly indicate that more is
going on here than just an increase in power.

Not sure any of this matters much. I just think explaining the improvements
I hear is more complicated than simply saying, "it's just more
power."