Anyone heard the marsh and odyssey amps?

The Marsh A400S bottom line: aesthetics C+, warranty C+, sound quality straight A ! This amplifier is about what's inside it. And at that, primarily its "intellectual" content, namely the circuit design and smart parts choices. Mr Marsh must know a trick or two that other designers (i.e. at Levinson or Krell) do not know, because he has built an amp that outperforms the best solid state around in many areas, and all for $2,000. Mind you, I'm not sure that this is the amp for impossible speaker loads --in that case probably you should wait for the new Marsh monoblocks or go with a Krell or something like that. But if you have reasonable speakers and are looking for sonic purity that is not unrealistically clinical, nor blatantly euphonic, this is your amp ! The Marsh delivers in all aspects of the frequency range in a virtually seamless manner. The bass is very controlled but quite lively and best matched to speakers with good bass extension. The Marsh delivers a truly audiophile quality bass, in my opinion. The midrange is simply unbelievable; it is so transparent and pure that the Marsh will convey your source information to your speakers virtually without artifacts (read noise) or colorations, unlike most other amps, be they solid state or tubes. And the Marsh will deliver detail without artificially delineating the mids. In this area it is as good as the best amps around. The highs are well balanced, airy, realistic, never harsh (if your speaker has the right tweeter). All parts of the spectrum are in my opinion presented more realistically than in the Bryston 4B-ST, which is also an overachieving amp in its price class. Again, I would chose this amp over many Levinson's or Krells costing $8, $10 or $15K. Dynamics are outstanding, at both micro and macro levels. Orchestral nuances are presented realistically, as are bombastic highs. Rock or pop, given the right recording, will sound great (but if you feed it crap it will sound like crap). Usage is convenient: it does not weigh a ton (but is pretty substantial), has two pairs of binding posts for bi-wiring, and is fully balanced (also has RCA inputs). My take: this amp will drive 99% of the speakers out there better than 99% of the amps out there.

Brulee, you may be right but please be more specific. What amps in the $8-10K range are better sounding than the Marsh ? Which tube amps that you posess "slaughter this amp"?

Brulee, were you being cynical when you replaced the word "slaughtered" with "annihilated" ? Now, seriously, which ARC do you own and believe sounds better than the Marsh ? I love ARCs. Still, in my experience the Marsh is better than both the 100 and 200 watt tubed ARCs. Better in every part of the spectrum, better in dynamics, and better in transparency ! I have not heard the reference 300 and 600 but they cost as much as a BMW and will probably raise your living room temperature by 10 degrees. I have also not heard the other amps, and never even herd of Gryphon. The only amp I can think of which rivals the Marsh and costs less than 10K is the Gamut, which is around $5K. I would say it is marginally more transparent in the midrange, somewhat purer in the highs, but less good than the Marsh in the bass. The differences are marginal, perhaps even just imagined.

I think we all agree that every individual has the right to choose whatever he/she wishes. But also in my experience individual wishes may evolve, change as one is exposed to new experiences and learns more about what there is out there. Certainly my views are changing, and have changed. Otheriwse I'd be dead. For now, I agree that many tube amplifiers deliver a very pleasing sound by essentially introducing greater even-order harmonics into the music. These amps minimize or cloak odd order harmonics which are universally irritating. The flip side of these designs frequently includes a lesser ability to reproduce frequency extremes (e.g. lesser bass control, roll-off highs), as well as limitations to realistically reproduce complex or demanding musical passages (e.g. large orchestras). Furthermore, some argue this "euphonic" sound over time becomes fatiguing. I acknowledge, however, that there are certain tube amps out there which have ingeniously avoided most of these drawbacks (e.g. the top ARCs, the Wolcott Presence, the Atmaspheres, recent Jadis, etc.) but at astronomical prices and significant user-unfriendliness (heat, tubes, breakdown, maintenance, weight). Some people claim that these no-holds-barred tube amps offer the peak of music reproduction, period. And perhaps they do. But they seldom cost less than $10K (the Wolcott is around $9K, it is a superb amplifier for difficult loads, and has variable output impedance). However, I respectfully submit that there is no tube amp out there at a price of around $2K that even comes close to the overall performance of the Marsh A400S solid stat3e amp. I am not trying to impose this view on anyone, and I appreciate that many of you respect my opinion, as I do yours. But expressing differing views is more illuminating to all than wallowing on our common views, so please bear with me. In the end, of course, you will make your own decision, whether it be the Marsh, the Odyssey (which I haven't heard), or a tube amp.

I am not aware of any Marsh CD player in existence.