Pass Labs AMP’s- What is the best Pass Amp Sound for You from past 10 years


So I have an XA-25 and its outstanding. I’ve tested the XA60.8 mono’s and there was not enough difference to move to them; no jaw dropping moments. Don’t get me wrong they were fantastic, but so is the XA25. Looking at the 350.8 or 250.8, etc.... even in comparison the Integrated INT-250... If you love it; want to explain what you like and why? I’m wondering what others are thinking... 
My set up: Wilson Sophia II’s, XA-25, Pass Labs XP-22 pre, Merging+NADAC. 
jahatl513
jahatl513, I believe I go into the use of one channel on each amp in the review of the First Watt J2 I wrote for dagogo.com 

Hey 64voxac30,

My three favorite amplifiers in a ranked order on the Ulf's are:

1) Coda No.8 2) Threshold S/550e 3) Pass Labs XA-25

The XA-25's harmonics/tonality are beautiful on the Ulf speakers.  However, because it does not drop as much current as the other two amplifiers it just misses out on the total control of the speaker that the other amps offer.  
The XP25 is NOT part of the .8 series. The info I got from Nelson are those :Question : Just found you have a XA25 amp as "entry line". It seems to be from 2016 but the name XA25 would make me think it is from the same generation than the XA60 so 2006 Is it the case ?
And how would you rate the first watt against the .8 knowing I don't need
power (my very old speakers have a 97dB sensitivity @ 4ohms) ? Seems the SIT-3 is almost sold out and the last SIT amp. So it's now or never.
" The XA25 design is different from theX and XA amplifiers previously.  It does not operate in balanced mode, there is anRCA unbalanced input, and the black output connector goes to ground.
Also, the design eliminates the degenerating resistors usually found in
amplifiers for the purpose of locally minimizing gain and giving stability to parallel transistors.
Additionally, the amplifier's output stage bias is controlled by a new
circuit which keeps the bias current constant over a wide range of temperature and other conditions so as to allow operation without having degeneration in the output stage.
It is very different from the SIT-3.  The XA25 is a "third harmonic" sort of
amplifier, and the SIT-3 is "second harmonic".  The SIT-3 is relatively warm and polite and the XA25 is very dynamic and detailed.
Fortunately the SIT-3 is very happy with 4 ohms, and so either amplifier should be ablework well.  It comes down to your personal taste."
Question : So the X25 would be closer to what I'm looking for : as neutral as possible, WYHIWIOTS (What You Hear Is What Is On The Support) and musics : classical and acoustic jazz, mainly piano. 35 years of piano have (mis?)educated my ears as I like better faithfulness than shear pleasure.
" Both XA (30.5 and 30.8) amplifiers are a mix of 2nd and 3rd, depending on the load and the level.  They start out as 2nd (harmonics) at low levels and are 3rd a high levels.  The XA.8 products have more 2nd in proportion at low levels than XA.5 product"
Question :"Which would you consider as the most neutral ?
They all have the low order harmonics, just in different proportion.
Sonically the XA25 and XA30.5 are roughly equivalent in this regard.
The biggest difference in my opinion is that the XA25 has interesting
character is dynamics, largely due to lack of degeneration in circuit."
Question : So you like better the X25 than the X30.5 according to what I'm looking for. 
" I like them both.  XA30.5 is a little more relaxed."

Question :
And compared to the X30.8 ?" I think XA30.8 is better, has a little more 2nd to 3rd ratio.  Also bigger
supply and more heat sinks and bias current."

More to come I hope.
Lesonaussie2- Then I have a question. Of the big Pass amps, is there one that shares those characteristics of the XA25? 

douglas_schroeder - 
My Sophia II's are single wired, and per your article and in general - 
     [the speaker is single wired, not bi-wireable. So, simply use one channel of each amp for each speaker.Take the single interconnect Left or Right out from the preamp and direct it to only one input of the amp. One channel goes unused. The output from the single channel is sent by the one speaker cable to the single pair of binding posts of the respective speaker, and only one channel per speaker, providing better performance than one stereo amp]
Did Nelson ever comment on this? Do you get the full power to the one channel being used? Does this change anything with respect to Ohlm's and speaker? I am curious and have wondered about this. Is there a better way?