How Do Odyssey Amps Stack Up To McCormack Amps.

I have heard the DNA1 too, and though none of the amps in question are anywhere near what I would call perfect, I'm sorry but the Odyssey was a clear winner to my ears, especially for its superior transparency and lack of grain. With the Odyssey you forget about the gear, forget you are listening to a recording and get lost in the truly believable performance, but with the DNA's you can't help but notice the amp. To me that aspect is very, very important. The Mc is not a bad amp, the Odyssey just much better to my ears. Others doing the same comparison have had similar experiences to mine as well, but I surely don't doubt others taste would lead them prefer the opposite conclusion! The virtues of both amps are plentiful on the net from many reviewers, pick what's more important to you and roll with it!

However, to say that the Odysseys where made to compete with NAD/Rotel makes me question if you have heard or know anything about the amps, or perhaps didn't set them up properly. They are copies of the near $4K Symponic Line amps from Germany, made in the US at much reduced cost, savings which are passed onto the consumer. WRT McCormack vs Levinson? Are you serious?!!!

Both are impressive, but I'm partial to the modded McCormacks. I don't think you will find many SS amps better than a fully modded McCormack at any price.

As for the stock versions, Peter Moncrief reviewed both and liked them almost equally if you read his International Audio Review.

Personally, I would go with the older McCormacks (DNA .5 or 1) for two reasons. First, these are the models that can be modified and the full mods surpass the current production models. Second, the McCormacks are more preamp friendly than the Odyssey. I don't think a passive preamp is advisable (and definitely not optimal) with the Odyssey.

You might want to look around I have seen the DNA225 for around $2100. Try www.tsto.com. They are good guys. Also, might want to take a look at Stereophile. They gave the DNA225 a class "B" rating.. Enjoy listening..

I had a DNA-1 Rev. A with extras, and I'm sorry, but as good as it was, it still sounded somewhat sterile and cold. Yes, it was quiet, grain-free, and very black. When I would put on audiophile brass recordings, there was no bloom to the brass, a flatter imaging, no body to the instruments. I was comparing this to a tube amp, I should point out, but I do think there are other solid state amps that do things better.

So what would some of you that own either brand, say the sonic characteristics/differences between the two brands. Also, I must say I listen from a wide variety of material from Bela Fleck on DVD-Audio, to Norah Jones on 200 gram vinyl, to Tool on compact disc. And by the way..thanks for all the great comments so far....