Where to go after Bel Canto Ref1000MKII

I may have user bias as I'm on my 3rd set of Mcintosh amps and preamps, Mc300 Mc500 1.2kw. I keep hearing of the lack of speed with Mc, maybe its true, as I've not compared in house with anything but. I will say the 1.2s are way more transparent, quiet, liquid, controlling, dynamic, immediate, fast, etc. than my previous Mc amps. At a recent visit to my dealer he had the new Diamond 800s with Classe 600 monos and needless to say it sounded very good but did not have the "mojo" of my 800ds with the 1.2s. To be fair my amps are next to the speakers and his were 10+ feet away and rack mounted and my cabling is better than he was using. Although it sounded great, it was'nt even close, but for almost twice the price and twice the power it should be.

@05-07-12: Dhartwick
How do you describe the improvement that the Electrocompaniet gave you over the Bel Canto Ref1000MkII. And, what magnitude of improvement?

Doggiehowser - is that the Bel Canto 1000MII that you replaced or the Bel Canto amp before it?

===========
I used the Bel Canto REF1000s first, and this was upgraded to MkII aka REF1000M specs subsequently.

I recently swapped out the REF1000Ms for Electrocompaniet Nemos while my SA-Reference was sent to my friend's place while I wait for my second set of speakers. He was also using REF1000Ms and the same speakers as mine (Thiel CS3.7s)

The REF1000Ms have tight control of the bass but was a bit lean in the midrange, but I did alleviate that with an ARC Reference 5 (then 5SE) tube preamp.

The Nemos maintain that same control of the bass, but there's just a bit more heft and authority to the bass and the midrange is a bit sweeter than on the Bel Cantos.

One of the larger Blue Circle amps might be an interesting option to consider.

Doggiehowser - Thanks for that answer. If I understand correctly, you're talking about a small difference between the Bel Canto Ref1000mII and the Nemo. Since you said the SA-Reference was a slight improvement in every regard except the bass, as compared with the Nemo, I'll conclude that the Bel Canto and the SA-Reference are also close. Does my conclusion jive with your experience? I realize that the magnitude of the difference you heard may become greater were you to compare amps in a more revealing system--if such a thing exists.

Hi Dhartwick

I think prior to tweaks, there was a fair bit of difference between the Nemos and the Bel Canto REF1000Ms in the showroom. In my case, the BC and Nemos were carried by the same dealer who also carried my speakers (Thiel CS3.7s) so it was very easy to make a direct comparison. In the showroom, the Bel Cantos sounded very lean vs the Nemos. The bass control was similar but just felt more weighted in the Nemos.

In the time I had the Bel Cantos, I made a couple of significant changes:
a. Sound Application RLS240 conditioner
b. ASI Liveline power cords
c. ARC Ref 5SE

With these in place, I felt there was a significant improvement in the overall performance of the system.

When I swapped the Bel Cantos out for the Nemos, the major change I felt was in the bass. It was still as tight as with the Bel Cantos but there was more authority and more presence to it which I liked, similar to what I heard in the showroom. But the leanness I heard in the showroom was alleviated by the ARC tubes.

As for the Plinius SA-Reference, my friend feels it edged out the Nemos. It's rated lower in terms of power output (that's what I meant earlier) but in terms of performance, my friend preferred it a lot more than the Bel Cantos and based on the experience of the same dealer showroom, he thought it sounded just a bit better than the Nemos.