Anyone heard the marsh and odyssey amps?

I think we all agree that every individual has the right to choose whatever he/she wishes. But also in my experience individual wishes may evolve, change as one is exposed to new experiences and learns more about what there is out there. Certainly my views are changing, and have changed. Otheriwse I'd be dead. For now, I agree that many tube amplifiers deliver a very pleasing sound by essentially introducing greater even-order harmonics into the music. These amps minimize or cloak odd order harmonics which are universally irritating. The flip side of these designs frequently includes a lesser ability to reproduce frequency extremes (e.g. lesser bass control, roll-off highs), as well as limitations to realistically reproduce complex or demanding musical passages (e.g. large orchestras). Furthermore, some argue this "euphonic" sound over time becomes fatiguing. I acknowledge, however, that there are certain tube amps out there which have ingeniously avoided most of these drawbacks (e.g. the top ARCs, the Wolcott Presence, the Atmaspheres, recent Jadis, etc.) but at astronomical prices and significant user-unfriendliness (heat, tubes, breakdown, maintenance, weight). Some people claim that these no-holds-barred tube amps offer the peak of music reproduction, period. And perhaps they do. But they seldom cost less than $10K (the Wolcott is around $9K, it is a superb amplifier for difficult loads, and has variable output impedance). However, I respectfully submit that there is no tube amp out there at a price of around $2K that even comes close to the overall performance of the Marsh A400S solid stat3e amp. I am not trying to impose this view on anyone, and I appreciate that many of you respect my opinion, as I do yours. But expressing differing views is more illuminating to all than wallowing on our common views, so please bear with me. In the end, of course, you will make your own decision, whether it be the Marsh, the Odyssey (which I haven't heard), or a tube amp.

I have heard both the A200 and A400 from Marsh, along with their SS preamp. Both times I compared it with the $2700 Primare integrated amp. With the A200 the contest was close. I liked the Primare's smoothness and the Marsh's clean, dynamic sound. With the A400 I definitely preferred Marsh. The Marsh system not only had better dynamics and much stronger & cleaner bass, but it also sounded more detailed, had a better soundstage, and overall sounded more natural. The sonic balance is neutral. The Primare was smooth and warm but sounded colored, compressed, and had soft bass. I have read some glowing reviews on it, and I think it is overrated. This comparison was done on a Marsh CD player and both Hales and Meadowlark speakers. I haven't heard the Odyssey but read a review that it takes a long time to break in.

I am not aware of any Marsh CD player in existence.

Joe_coherent, Have you compared the Marsh a400 to the Belles 350A? I know that the the Belles 350A is a winner. I don't know much about the tha Marsh a400. But I have had exp. with the the Belles 350A. The Belles 350A is the greatested solid state amp I've heard. I'm a tube freak for the most part. The Belles 350A sounds as close to tube as I've heard. The Bel Canto Evo is another solid state amp that is up there.

In my earlier posting I accidentally listed a Marsh CD player as the source. It was actually a Primare, sorry about the mistake. There is no Marsh CD player, as Joe_coherent pointed out.