Vandersteen 3A sigs amp advice please

As one who is very familiar with the Vandersteen's and a former owner of the Audio Research SP-9 Mk III, a very high priority of mine would be to sell the SP-9. You will never get the best from the Vandersteens with that preamp. I don't know your budget but top of the line alternatives include CAT, Hovland, Ayre, Aesthetix. A good budget alternative would be Audible Illusions (Modulus 3 is better than 3A). As far as amps go, I have heard the 3A Signatures with Belles (not impressed), Bel Canto (not impressed), Ayre V1 (very good, but not fantastic) and Rogue Audio (not enough bass). Have heard the 3A's with Krell, Plinius SA-100 and Pass Aleph 4. I would match the 3A Signatures with the Alephs. The Aleph should be available for about $3000. They are warm, smooth, have great soundstage and detail, with terrific bottom end extension and very good top end extension. The Vandersteen's are so dynamic that they really don't need an explosive amplifier like the Plinius or the old Krell amps. The 3a Signatures I find to be less dynamic than the 3A's with a slightly improved top end over the 3A's, so I think it would be a very good match with the Aleph's which are a little laid back in the high end. If that is still not enough slam or high end detail, consider a Pass X-250, but in my opinion, it shouldn't be necessary since the Vandy's move a lot of air on their own. These amps will take your system far beyond the McCormack amps' capabilities. But, if I were you, I would work on the preamp first. If you a/b the SP-9 with any of my preamp suggestions you will never go back.

Sorry. I didn't mean to bad-mouth the entire McCormack DNA series. My experience is limited to DNA .5 Deluxe and DNA 1 Deluxe. I understand the DNA 2 is in a different class, but I haven't heard it. Even the .5 and 1 are very good amps for the money, but the Pass amps are clearly in a different class, IMO. And the Vandersteen's are a speaker which is capable of letting you hear the difference between the DNA .5 or 1 and either Aleph 2's (monoblock version of Aleph 4) or Aleph 4.

By the way, I have heard the DNA 125 (not with Vandy's) and didn't think it even came close to either DNA .5 or DNA 1 in sound quality. What do other people think?

Garfish, I must admit to not being familiar to the changes associated with Steve McCormack's various revisions of the original DNA series. I know that many people sing their praises. Don't get me wrong about the DNA .5/1 Deluxe or non-Deluxe. When I first heard them, I almost bought one. When you take into account price, they are a super buy. They have great bass slam which the Aleph doesn't have, very good midrange and overall very good dynamics. But to my ears they are a little rolled off in the high end when compared with an Aleph. The Aleph 4's also provide better detail, soundstaging, and excellent bass extension, if not great slam IMO. The Aleph doesn't have outstanding dynamics and is a little "suppressed" in the upper midrange. I guess I would give all these characteristics different weights than you, Craig, but I would come out with the Aleph way ahead of either the DNA .5 or 1, Deluxe or non-Deluxe. Again, I have no experience with any of the revisions by SMcAudio. Then you are comparing an amp around $2000 vs $7000 (retail prices). It ought not to be a fair comparison. Still say that the Vandersteen 3 series (particularly the 3 and 3A non-Signature) were some of the most dynamic speakers I have ever heard. They have plenty of get-up-and-go regardless of the amplifier used. You could mate them with a less dynamic amplifier. The 3A Signature, having a little bit more high end detail than the 3a(although still forgiving) could be even a better match than a 3A with the Aleph 2,4 or 1.2, given that these amps are all a little laid back in the upper mids. Kevziek: Hmmm. It is possible that I just got a bad audition of the DNA-125, but I found it to be a little lifeless. Don't remember the other electronics but the speakers where Alon 5's. Amp seemed to have a lot less slam than the earlier DNA's, but I must admit I found the Alon 5 to sound a little weird on its own. No amp that we tried seemed to straighten out the sound. So, maybe that was the fundamental problem.