Comparing MA-6900 to the DK Design VS-1 MkII. . .

Audioaril, I mentioned that something could have been wrong with my sample because my experience with the DK amp was so contrary to the positive reviews and with Larry Staples' and Daniel K's take on the amp that both Daniel and Larry concluded that something must have been wrong with my sample DK amp. That could very well have been the case.

Since I did not have access to another DK amp to try out, I was willing to give DK and LSA the benefit of the doubt enough to mention that my impression of the DK amp could have been formed by a non-representative sample of the product. That is all I meant by my earlier comment.

Along those lines, another A-goN'er, who actually was asked (by DK) to write a review for posting on AudiogoN, also did not really care for the amp. Daniel K claimed that his sample must have also been defective. So...I am not sure what to make of all of this. I am willing to go along with the possibility that both our samples were, in fact, not up to normal operating condition...up to a point.

On first impression, it is almost as if you have to like the amp or the amp is considered a bad sample. I am willing to go along with that, to some extent, if I could actually get a good sample DK amp to listen to and fully give it its due. But after my first experience AND the hassles I experienced in returning it (as I was promised I could do), I am reluctant to try any more DK products.

I hear that LSA is changing both the quality control issues and the customer service issues. Fantastic, good moves in the right direction.

Kalan, thats interesting. I did exactly the same comparison in my system and my impression was quite the opposite. The Mac sounded like hifi, the DK sounded like music.

Kalan, when you say that your sample could have been sub-standard or that something may have been wrong with it, what do you mean by that?

Even though this thread has gone "cold," let me say that I had a DK VS-1 Mk II in house for about 3 weeks and then a Mac 6900 for about 5 days but not at the same time.

Based on sound alone, I was way more interested in the Mac than the DK...and by a wide margin. My DK sample could have been sub-standard with possibly something wrong with it, but I was completely disappointed in its performance. The Mac has some redeeming qualities in its sound and basically got most things right but still did not have enough going for it for me to give up my separates.

Mike:

I think you're confusing "Build Quality" with longevity. The McIntosh is superbly built gear, and probably one of the best in the business on build quality. I HAVE heard the DK, and I have popped the top. I can tell you that the build quality on the DK is equal to the best I have seen. It's not as chunky as a McIntosh in terms of 3/4 faceplate and all, but it's built as good as anything coming out of Levinson's doors.

As far as longevity though, no one really knows, and probably no one will ever be able to take that from McIntosh.

hi bud,very true in the fact that i am biased but only to a point & not to a fault,ill explain.

most people tend to speak of what they know & my comments were no different.

when this amp is being compared to SET amps SET owners speak of what they know to be a quality of most SET amps that will be hard to match.

i have zero knowledge about SET amps so i cant speak about those comparisons but i have a vast knowledge about mac gear being that ive tried about 70% of that manufacturers product line from all build periods in my home.

i wasnt comparing the sound between the 2 different units & the DK amp might very well be better in that area & i will never know about that comparison unless i have it in my home to try out & the look of the gear being compared is subject to personal preferences.

my coments were not soley based on MCINTOSH gear but were generalized about comparing a new product with equipment that has proven durable & lasting over the course of many decades.

i could of went further with my examples of gear that is built to last a life time & has proven itself to do just that but the amp wasnt being compared to any other gear & my personal knowledge of other gear is very small but i know mcintosh gear in & out.

the one & only point that i was trying to make was that the durability factor really needs to come into play at some point here dosent it?

i wish the best of luck to DK design & i truly hope that they have designed a fantastic sounding product that will last a life time but more needs to be proved here other than just good sound & low pricing.

please keep in mind that my comments were based SOLEY on durability & not sound or looks.

mike.

Mike, You're biased ; ) The DK may be a good amp and it may be equal to or better than the MA6900, I've never heard it, but it's hard to compete against the legacy of Mcintosh if you're drawn to Mcintosh in the first place. The Dk may draw people in for its sound quality especially for its price, but the Mcintosh will draw people in for sound quality and many others reasons too incuding its extensive feature list and styling.

ive yet to hear or see the DK gear at any dealers but as soon as i do see it im gonna RUN TO SEE IT!

all the hype over this stuff has sucked me in,i have heard the MCINTOSH MA-6900 many times & if its gonna compete with that its really got its hands full.

one things for sure though,the DK gear will never in a million years be able to compete with the build quality of the mac.

its very doubtfull to say the least that ANY newly designed gear will be able to stand the test of time with the likes of mcintosh & audio research & so on who's designs are lasting well over 50 years.

that would be the scary part for me no matter how it sounds,where will that amp be in 10 years or so ?

mike.