McCormack DNA-1 vs. Adcom GFA-5802


Relative noob here. I'm looking for a new (used) 2-channel amp to power my new Polk LSi9 bookshelf speakers. I've pretty much decided that I want to get the McCormack DNA-1. I've considered the Parasound Halo 23, as well as the Adcom GFA-5802, but it sounds like the McCormack DNA-1 is the better amp, according to a number of folks (unfortunately, I'm unable to personally listen to any of them).

My question is this: if the McCormack is the better amp, why is it priced around the same place as the Adcom and the Parasound in the current used market? I realize that the Adcom has a bit more power, and Parasound has made some great amps, but people seem pretty unanimous in preferring the DNA-1 for sound quality. What gives? Am I missing something? Is the used market just not as rational as I thought it would be, or has the superiority of the DNA-1 to the Adcom GFA-5802, and the Parasound Halo 23, been overstated? Is it just a matter of taste? Preference for the DNA-1 seemed to transcend mere fanboy-ism.

Thanks for any input.
bthogan

Showing 2 responses by tbromgard

IMO-The McC is heads and heals above the Adcom to be sure-much more musical and life like presentation. I dont have experience with the Parasound, so I cant comment on that amp. With your speakers you might consider a DNA .5 Deluxe or modified versions. It should be ample power, costs a bit less and is considered by some to have better sound than the DNA 1. Good luck.
Good luck Mr. Bthogan. Steve McCormack is very accessible and will answer questions and is available to perform mods if you like. I know from experience.