Rowland 112 vs McCormack .5 Rev A

I don't think the rowland would have a enough juice to keep the maggies singing. If you could step up to an 8TiHC then that would work well, but the smaller JRDG amps would be straining on 3.6's. I have used a number of amps on my 3.6 from a 60 watt tube amp to a 600 watt ss amp. The more power the better but what you need is high current. I like the BAT VK-500w/bat pak best of what I have tried but I am looking forward to trying Bob Crumps latest creation the parasound JC-1. I hear great things from other members about McCormack I just am not confident in them having the reserve power to make maggies sing. In the 3k range for an amp I don't think you could be disatisfied with the BAT.

I had the same quandary. Thought about upgrading my 0.5, after I'd bought Von Schweikert VR 4s - I talked to Steve McCormack, who said the upgrade wouldn't do anything to provide more power - just a sonic upgrade. I needed more power to push the VR's bass.

I went to the Rowland Model 10 (after stopping by the BAT VK 6200 x 4 for a bit), and am exquisitely happy. The BAT was on the dry side - no swing.

At "only" 150W, the Model 10 powers these babies like you wouldn't believe. It's all in the switching technology - and musical as all get out.

Now the VRs are 90db, so I'd suggest an audition if you can swing it.

Good luck, and good listening.

Barton

I would like to add a few points: 1) The DNA-0.5 (Rev A or otherwise) delivers about 120 Watts-per-channel into an 8 ohm load. The Rowland 112 is rated at 150W per, so the difference in 8-ohm-power is very small. The real difference is current delivery into lower impedances, and the Rowland has the larger power supply. 2) I now offer an upgrade Plitron toroid transformer for the DNA-0.5 that is huge, in relative terms. This delivers a large increase in available current and a rather amazing performance improvement - especially in the bass region. I believe that this would take care of any performance issues you have with the Magnepans, and at a much lower cost than switching amplifiers. 3) Have you experimented with other preamps recently? This might be worth a try, as the Theta is primarily a surround processor - a very good one, but still designed mainly for surround duty. In my experience, a good 2-channel preamp will outperform a surround-decoder for listening to music.

Give me a call if you would like to discuss any of this.

Happy holidays,
Steve McCormack
www.SMcAudio.com
760-732-0352