Thoress full-function vs Coincident CSLS/CSPS

I have heard neither, but there is a gent that talks at length about Coincident on his blog/webpages. 

I don't know if you are familiar with HIGH-END AUDIO and Arthur Salvatore . He is a bit of a Coincident fanboy but he does describe what he hears pretty well. I found if I looked past the "promotion" part, some of his comments are worth reading and helpful.

Disclaimer. I don't know Arthur and I am neither pro or anti the guy. I know some folk don't like him at all. 

I have CSLS MkII with upgraded Amtrans rotary selectors, never heard the Thoress. Major differences I can see is CSLS transformer coupled dual volume control vs. dual volume pots for Thoress, +1 for CSLS. Coincident also fully balanced, so not only balanced interconnects, but dual output transformers and signal path, +2 for CSLS.

My system comprised of choice of custom built 300B SET monoblocks, Coincident 845SET or PL Dialogue Four-diy modded with boutique caps and Takman resistors. Extreme modded Klipschorns and Merlin VSM-MM, Musetec LKS-005 dac. I have analog setup as well, separate phono stage.
CSLS is simply great pre, performers in room level of resolution, transparency, wonderful timbre, tonally balanced. I'm prejudiced, get the CSLS. I'd imagine the PS should be special as well.

Hi @pauly, I’m familiar with the website you mention. I have a CSLS in my system, so I know that side of the equation! 
@sns thanks for chiming in! I already have a CSLS, so the question I’m trying to answer whether Thoress is a lateral move or an upgrade. I’m very happy with CSLS, but the idea of one box solution is tempting.

I believe that the German Thoress is a top notch manufacturer of excellent tube electronics. You never know for certain until you hear a product or better yet do a direct comparison between two competing components.

I seriously doubt that the Thoress preamplifier would outperform the CSLS. I own the CSLS and had the opportunity to hear more expensive excellent preamplifier/line stages. All truly terrific but not better than the CSLS. It does consist of two heavy chassis /boxes and umbilical cable and takes up space.
you 
Four boxes if you add the phono stage. So I understand the desire for a smaller (Neater?) 1 chassis solution. In terms of sound quality I just believe that it will not be easy to beat it. The CSLS is a superb unit.
Charles

Get a VAC much better then both had Thoress lousy service dumped it.

A good friend had the VAC Signature MK II for about  5 years and it is excellent and one of the "more expensive " preamplifiers I was referring to above. I listened to It many times during his ownership. I’ve heard It paired with my 300b SET mono blocks, beautiful pairing.

However It is not better sounding than the Coincident Statement Line Stage. Both have stellar drive, dynamics, musical flow and pace. Both are excellent across the board. The CSLS is more transparent and pure in my opinion. Could be 6SN7 character versus 101D character. Music lovers would be ecstatic to have either in their audio system.
Charles

Addendum,
I may be incorrect regarding the signal tubes in the VAC Signature MK II Line Stage but I know they were not 4 pin DHT such as the 101D. Again you could not possibly go wrong with either Line stage.
Charles

Hi @ebm, can you share your service experience? Did you compare line and phono on the VAC against the Thoress? 
@charles1dad thanks for sharing your observations! Were you able to audition the VAC and the CSLS in same system? 
Thank you

@ray19,
My friend and I listened to music on each other’s systems a lot but we never swapped the line stages. We  acknowledged that both were splendid sounding. Only took my 300b SET to his home because he was curious to hear them with his speakers at that time. So it was his VAC connected to my mono block amplifiers . Fun times back then.
Charles

👍 Thanks Charles

Needed service waited a month after I got it back dumped it,The entire co is one guy.Good luck!!

Im using TW Acustic RPS 100 tube phono stage which is a world better than Thoress.

Thanks @ebm. IMHO one man company is not a negative by itself, but, the lack of US based service can be a hassle certainly