McCormack DNA 0.5 vs. Parasound HCA 2003

Tim, I've not heard the Parasound but the McCormack is hard to beat in its price range. Another thought is that the Vandys are a more revealing speaker than most folks give them credit for. Your preamp is very good. I assume you were running the McCormack with it previously and liked the combination. Other variables are the cables that you are using and whether or not you are conditioning the power in any way. As your system becomes more revealing, these things start to matter.

This sounds very strange to me, especially since in my experience the 3A Sigs are not bright sounding speakers at all. What are you using for a front end and cables/interconnects? I'm almost wondering if there's something wrong with one of the components or the speakers. I'd try another amp just to see what happens and go from there, but something just doesn't seem right here.

Just out of curiosity, what speakers were you using before?

I wouldn't say Vandies are bright. What cables are you using?

I haven't heard the 3A sigs in a while, but Richard Vandersteen has been continually modifying them without changing the model number. If your pair is less than one year old, it could have the same drivers as the 5A and would be more revealing than a pair of 3A sigs that are more than five years old.

What speaker cables, interconnects, and CD player are you using (or are you playing vinyl)?

Years ago I replaced a Parasound HCA 2200 II with a McCormack DNA-1. The difference was pretty substantial. The guy that came to buy the Parasound amp almost walked away from the deal when he heard the DNA-1 in comparison.

Shakey