Amp's suggestions for B&W Nautilus Prestige?

Another option that I think about it is 4 x Jeff Rowland 112.

Get rid of the Wadia and ARC, and get yourself the entire top of the line Phonosophie gear.Superb mature sound.

Tomer

Nice meeting you in the Munich show. Did you get the new version w. the diamond tweeters? I bet they are amazing. It will be a lot of fun and active is the way to go. For the money you might want to try digital amplification for the bass and some tubes on top. You can have a lot of fun & headaches figuring it out. But definitely at least SS on the bass. I am very impressed w. the new Krell stuff but it is out of your price range. Maybe a pair of 5 channel Brystons would do the trick.

Jeff Rowland Design Group MC606 easily covers six channels for $12,800.

http://www.jeffrowland.com/MC606.htm

I would stay with Rowland for all 8 channels, finishing off with a couple of 501 mono-blocks, although you might go with lower watts for the tweeters, like the 201s or even the stereo 102, depending on the power need there. Finding another amp that'll match the Rowland's very low noise floor will be very tough.

I couldn't find a review of Phonosophie equipment, but looking at the chassis it's not in the same league with ARC, Rowland, or even Krell. I'd have to hear a very convincing demonstration to seriously consider it. I know there's more to an amp than the chassis, but it is a big part of controlling EFI and RFI.

Look at Guidocorona's review of the Rowland Capri pre-amp, where he compares it to his ARC Ref3. You might want to consider trading out since you seem to be putting together a no-holds-barred system.

I'm hoping your crossover is balanced. Given all those ICs, it'll be good if you can take advantage of a balanced amp topography.

Dave

Well I have the advantage of hearing all of the products above, and can tell you, it really takes a lot of guts to recomend a niche European brand versus the big guns. The reason behind this is simple , the Phonosophie sounds better, especially in an active system, because the brand itself has a mindset towards active setups. As far as chassis goes, the Phonosopie is better in real life than in pictures and I could hear no sonics artifacts caused by RFI and EMI.

I was told by a B&W representative at Munich high end show, that the Linn Akurate 4200 will not be powerfull enough.
Anther candidates are 4 x Plinius P10.
Link:
http://www.pliniusaudio.com/products/p10.asp

Goodness Sphere, you must get around. Where did you have the pleasure of hearing the Rowland MC606 as a tri-amp solution or as part of a quad-amp? What were its shortcomings vs the Phonosophie equivalent?

Rowland has (or had two weeks ago) the 606 set up in a tri-amp configuration driving a couple of custom Magicos (not anything you've seen in the audiophile mags).

Dave

My apologies, not the 606 but the 501s and all the reference Krells and the ARCs. I recommend the Phonosopie only because the situation demands an active setup. Let me put it this way, the Krells, ARC and the Jeffs make Kari Bremnes sound like top High end gear playing within varying degrees of audiophilia, the Phonosopie made her sound closer to human with a lesser degree of audiophile pyrotechnics. Anyways its just a recommendation, had the requirement been for a passive loudspeaker I would have gone another route depending on the speaker.

Mcintosh 501s X 8.

I am using the Jeff Rowland 616 500X2 250X4 and a 201 for the top with PC1. magic. have tried Classe /Parasound and find this is the best.

At that level I would not cut corners with amps. If it was me, and I wish it was, I would have two pair of high end monoblocks with really good biwire coming out of each. Many choices available could go SS on lows and tubes on mid/highs or all the same. My gut tells me like all B&Ws they really excel with amps with lots of headroom. If not you can give them to me to figure out. Ha,Ha,Hee,Hee