Innersound ESL amplifier - good choice?

thanks ASA,
it is just difficult to audition an amp without buying it and there are not many dealers near me. I will listen to the Plinius as that seems to be the main amp people prefer and am leaning that way right now. I used to have a Berning EA230 driving my original Quads. It was pretty tuneful. Quite frankly after having a power tube go out on the Rogue I am thinking I may not want tubes anymore for the power amp (plus I am cheap). I do not know if the Electrocomaniet has enough power, I am looking for more than the average volume and dynamic range, I would like to hear one though. Also the Rogue pre amp has a nice phono section, remote control volume and I like the service they provide. I know it can be beat but I do not even think of it being in the system, I does not attract attention to itself, so I feel it will do (nicely at that). Thanks again for your thoughtful comments, they are appreciated. Like I said before, now is not the time to spare my feelings, I would like all the details BEFORE I buy.

Cheers,
Phil

Hi Phil,

You mention that Innersound sounds anemic, pure and neutral, despite the use of your tube preamp. Part of the reason is due to the inherent sound of the Innersound but I also believe the Blue Heavens magnifies a few of the Innersound's weaknesses. While very transparent, Nordost cables tend to sound analytical, thread bare and lacking in harmonic complexity. The Innersound speaker cables , by comparison, work extremely well in situations where cable inductance is a factor (any speaker that uses input transformers) but offer no real advantage with your Maggies. Although I have not compared the Blue Heavens and Innersound cables side by side, I would expect that they sound very similar on your 1.6. At a similar price point, I would highly recommend Analysis Plus Oval 9 cables. They have more impact with a full, yet articulate bottom end, wonderful clarity and smoothness in the mids and highs, and an absolute lack of grain or hardness, despite it's airy, detailed top end. I just sold a pair to a customer who owns Maggie 3.6 and he LOVES them! It gives the price-no-object cables a serious run for the money for way, way less.

Regarding Plinius vs Electrocompaniet, they both offer some of the very best that solid state amplification has to offer. While Plnius tends to be slightly faster, transparent and more neutral overall, Electrocompaniet sounds sweeter and warmer in the midrange and highs, fuller and richer in the low end, with state of the art sound staging, imaging, detail and micro and macro dynamics. Electrocompaniet is almost always my first recommendation to anyone who loves the sound of tubes but doesn't want the inconvenience. The choice really comes down to three things: personal preference, value and your electricity bill.

The current Plinius SA-100 MK III, which is my favorite all time Plinius amp, puts out 100 wpc and cost $4500. The current SA-250 MK IV puts out 250 wpc, costs $8500 but is not as refined sounding as the SA-100 MK III. Both amplifiers draw tons of power in Class A mode and will drive up your electricity bill too.

By comparison, the Electrocompaniet AW220, whose performance I prefer to the SA-100 MK III and much prefer to the SA-250 MK IV, puts out over twice as much power as the SA-100 and nearly as much as the SA-250, yet costs $4000 per pair. In addition, because the AW220 is biased into high Class AB, the amplifier runs much cooler than either of the Plinius, saving you even more money in the long term. I also happen to think that Electrocompaniet equipment is absolutely gorgeous, fitting in equally well in either contemporary or traditional surroundings.

I have finally decided on a Plinius SA100 MKIII amplifier and have listened for only 1 day. I can tell you the raves about this amp are justified in my opinion.
Starting with the high end, it is very open and highly nuanced with no edge and (in my system) seems slightly rolled off. The mids have a tone that constantly remind me of the tone of real instruments, the lows are very defined and if anything slightly light but also tuneful. Compared with the Innersound, the main improvement is less coloration, music could be light with very little bass or full and rich sounding, all dependant on the recording, where the Innersound had a little more of the one note bass and less finness in the mids and highs. Also the Plinius seems to have more detail and inner information and is more of one piece (HP's continuity?) top to bottom.
In comparison to the Rogue the Plinius high end is much more detailed, the Rogue sounds thick in the bottom and rolled on top (more than the Plinius). In the Rogues favor it has a quality of music that appears out of nowhere, especially horns or piano that are bathed in harmonics, which is good but they were too dull for my taste. Maybe with the right speakers I would choose the Rogue over the Plinius (maybe not).
The Innersound had a very immediate presentation of the music that had a nice appeal but maybe was threadbare, and of course the Innersound had amazing dynamics that neither the Plinius or Rogue could dream of, Maggies need tons of power I now see for certain. I had a special Innersound amp with an extra large power supply and I could not believe how loud 1.6's go, approaching the volume of live drums, I swear.
Again I am very thankful for all the support you guys have given me, it has helped a lot.