Opinions on deHavilland Mercury 2

I have had the deHavilland Mercury for 7 months and it may be the most satisfying new component in my 40 years of audiophile indulgence. The Mercury 2 can only sound better because Kara would only make a change for the better! In brief the Mercury sounds real, real, real! Very nonfatiguing, full bodied, solid imaging, accurate timbre and in my sytem, no shortcomings. It just plain passes the music. I love jazz and opera and most of the time I am transported to the live performance. This has to be one of the best values in state of the art components. The tubes are way under stressed and probably last 10,000 hours, also cheap to replace!

Slingshot, One of the characteristics of the Mercury which makes it so nonfatiguing and natural is the lack of edge and any spectacular "electronic sound". It does require some break-in and after break-in sounds best after about an hour warm up. You, probably know all this. I suspect the customer who who sent it back had a component mismatch or was looking for a more upfront sound. I am sure it is more complicated then that. AC line conditioning, isolation, "wires" all make a difference. I must admit, I have never heard lifeless or dull sound coming through the Mercury. I understand however the Mercury 2 improvements were Kara's attempt to add a little more life to the sound, but told me in an email not to upgrade since I was so happy. I previously used the Pass 2.5 which is an excellent very neutral preamp and highly recommended. The Mercury however goes beyond in harmonic accuracy and timbre. I find the images more true to life with more bloom. This is a fun hobby. I am glad my system however is at a point I can just sit back and listen, thinking more about the performance and adding music to my collection.