Rich; organic true balanced amp w good detail $6k

Interesting, it sounds like we are looking for similar amps. I've also been eyeing some Clayton M-200's and Pass XA-60's. I did just pick up a BAT VK-75SE, and it sounds very good. It actually even had my wife saying positive things (very, very rare). I'm not sure if I'll keep the BAT yet though, as it throws out a tremedous amout of heat. I have to find a way to better control the heat dissipation to consider keeping it though. The BAT's sonics do have me leaning toward a tube amp though. I would love to hear a pair of VAC Musicbloc 160's. From my previous experience with BAT & VAC gear, I would imagine that the Musicbloc's would have more silky high's, while the BAT would have better bass. The VAC slightly lighter, the BAT slightly darker.
I'd also be interested in hybrid amps like the Aria WT100(XL), Aesthetix Atlas, or Blue Circle BC204, though none of these show up on the used market much.

FWIW, I'm currently using a ARC Ref 3 preamp.

Happy hunting,
John

Hey Sutts, yeah, believe it or not when I tried Jmcgrogan I was prompted that the name was already taken.......makes me wonder if I signed up before I knew I did, or if there is another Jmcgrogan....perhaps and evil Jmcgrogan??? So I'm stuck with Jmcgrogan2....as in Jmcgrogan 2 channel. :)

Preamp is the aformentioned ARC Ref 3, speakers are Verity Auido Parsifal Encore circa 2004. Listening room is 24 X 14 X 9. Musical preference is jazz/blues/rock/folk/classical.
Main source is vinyl (Basis/ZYX/Walker), then digital (Marantz SA-11S1 w/ Ultimate mod from Underwood/pcX)

Cheers,
John

Sutts, about the Pass, how much better do you think the XA-.5 series is? I ask because you will not find any used ones here since they are so new. I was thinking that many will now be dumping their XA's in search of XA-.5's. It would seem to me to be a good time to be looking for the XA's. You may be able to get a pair of XA-60's for the same price as a XA-30.5. Just a thought.

BTW, only the Belles MB-01 is biased into Class A, and it doesn't say if it's fully balanced or not. The Lamm's are very good, but I believe they are single-ended as well.
Here is a quote from the Belles website regarding Class A.

The key to accurate audio reproduction is the ability to resolve detail. To that end, David Belles has designed his first class A amplifier in 30 years. Everyone knows that class A biased amplifiers represent the pinnacle of what is possible in amplifier performance. However, designing and building a class A amplifier is no easy task. The first amplifier that Dave Belles designed more than 30 years ago was an class A amplifier known as the Belles A. Since that time, Dave Belles has learned what it takes to produce a truly great class A designed amplifier.

Class A design requires attention to tolerances, heat needs to be dissipated, power supplies need to be sufficient in order to produce an amplifier that does not compromise performance. The amplifier's power rating needed to be carefully selected in order to produce a unit that would drive most speakers at sound pressure levels that are satisfactory to most users.

Class A design is the best, regardless of what anyone would try to tell you.

I believe the VTL MB-450 Series II Signature with controlled bias is quite new. It was just reviewed in the Jan/08 Stereophile. I believe the reviewer (MF) had some issues with the biasing circuitry. Yes, I've been watching those too. Read the section entitled 'A Matter Of Reliability'.

FWIW, I have heard the Clayton amps. I used to own a pair of M-100 monoblocks. Very nice indeed. Possibly the best SS amps I've ever heard, and I've owned a few more expensive ones. The one nit I had about the M-100's was a low level transformer hum that I could not get rid of. I spoke with other Clayton owners who had similar problems.
I heard the new M-200's have new transformers, so hopefully Wilson has solved this dilemma.

Cheers,
John

Sutts, you are starting to confuse me. It seems like some recommendations are dismissed because they are not balanced (Pass XA-60, Moscode, Manley,etc.). While other single ended amps like the Belles, Lamm and EAR intrigue you. A little help here?
For me, true balanced is a must. My digital front end only outputs balanced, my preamp is fully balanced. Personally, there are enough fully balanced choices out there that I do not see the point in breaking the chain. YMMV.

BTW, the Clayton M-100's that I owned a while back are NOT fully balanced, but do offer balanced inputs, like VAC, EAR and others. The newer M-200's are fully balanced though. If these really interest you, you may try contacting Jonathan at Goldman Audio. He has mentioned to me that he has a demo pair for sale.

Cheers,
John

Haven't we established that the Belles and Lamm amps are balanced, or are you discussing fully differentially balanced versus non-differentially balanced? Also, it has not been established whether Belles or Lamm monoblocks are differentially balanced or not.
Tvad

I'm under the assumption that we are talking fully differential amplifiers, as the OP's first requirement was "fully balanced architecture", which I took as fully differential, not just balanced inputs. AFAIK, Belles and Lamm are not fully differential. The Belles MB-01 does run in Class A bias, which is what Sutts was looking for in SS, but in the Belles literature it only says that the MB-01 accepts fully balanced inputs, this does not mean that the amp itself is fully balanced.

Again, I know that fully balanced does not necessarily mean it will sound better, however, I do understand that if you are running a fully balanced system, it doesn't matter if you break the chain. A fully balanced source and amp won't run fully balanced with a single-ended preamp. Similarly, a fully balanced source and preamp will not deliver a fully balanced signal through a single ended amp.

There are many designs out there that have balanced inputs and outputs that are not fully differential designs. I guess it just comes down to is it a requirement for Sutts, or just a plus. For me, balanced is a requirement, for now. Just as if I go single ended in the future, buying a fully differential design would not be cost effective. Since it does cost more to do a fully differential design well, it would add no benefit if the other components are single ended. Just my $0.02.

Cheers,
John

I suppose it would be up to Sutts. As for me, I could very easily live with the Lamms, they are fabulous amps indeed. I could not say this about Belles though. I had a friend lend me his Belles 350A for a few weeks, a couple of years ago. Very clean and articulate, but rather thin and edgy sounding to me. My friend agreed and sold the amp about a month after I returned it to him. Maybe the newer Belles gear is better, and worth another listen. I wouldn't buy one, but would certainly audition one again if possible.

It's funny how we all listen to the same gear, but have different impressions. As Sarah (Sc53) mentions that Ayre has a gorgeous tube-like sound to her. I've heard Ayre equipment on several occasions (not the MR-X's though). I do agree with her assessment that they have lots of power on the low end, and would even add that they are dynamic, extended and transparent. However, never once when listening to Ayre gear did I ever think 'tube-like' sound....at all.
It's all about system synergy and personal tastes I suppose.....in which case, you're on your own Sutts....sorry.

Cheers,
John

Man I hate writing long replies and having the computer crap out on me...

Condensed version: Grant and Bill, I don't know whether it was a 350A or 350A Reference. It was a couple of years ago, and I only had it on loan for a month or so. Definitely stereo version though.

Sutts: Another brand to consider is Plinius, either SA-250 mk IV, SA-102 or SA-103. All are very musical will killer bass, and are pure Class A bias designs.

Cheers,
John