Need amp suggestion for PBN Montana EPS2.


I need a power amp to drive my Eps2. I have tried Bryston 4bsst-c, Spectron Musician III, Symphonic line RG7 MK3 with no success. Your suggestions would be helpful.
vlassiss
Since hearing them, I've only ever owned MONTANA. Everything I have heard subsequent to those acquisitions has confirmed that choice -- and when I say "confirmed," I guess I should say, I have been shocked at what others are paying good money for -- even internationally well-reviewed speakers.

Shocked.

I think I do know something of the difficulty in pairing them with amps though. These speakers are D E E E E P. Meaning that they can get right into the gut of an amp, tap it, and turn it inside out. Blew up a few amps getting rock concert volumes with audiophile sound. Speakers never quit, amps did. Experimented with Bryston -- pretty superficial, meaning maybe not getting to the performance MONTANA is capable of.

Like the Mac 501 suggestion -- perhaps the best overall performer with my KAS'. Not the most awesome vibrate-your-spleen-with-perfect-control bass however. Krell will show you what kind of bass these things can give you -- toss the subs -- but not enamored of the Krell sound, so went with Plinius. Bass almost there, but much preferred the Plinius sound through the spectrum. If you want zip, clarity, transparency, presence, loudness, bass control -- Plinius 102, or even the 100s.

Something might seem sluggish or rolled-off with the Macs versus that kind of pizazz, but that's what I have settled on -- very rich, full-bodied musicality there. Also have a pair of Parasound JC-1s that I listened to for about ten minutes -- due to moving, have not listened enough to give any testimony there.

Hope that was helpful.
@Maich it was really helpful indeed.
I was thinking about a second hand sa250mk4 or a pair of sa102 or 103.

What pre are u using with plinius?
Well, can't really go wrong with any of those, except in my opinion there is no compelling reason to get the 103 -- cost you around $5K versus the 102 which is essentially the same amp sonically.

A pair of 102s will rock your world, no doubt. The 250 I think will sound somewhat reluctant on top, a little slow, ponderous in the bass perhaps -- but only compared to the pair of 102s -- the 250 is a very fine amp indeed, but if you were transitioning from the 102s, you might well think you had lost something.

You know, I might compare the 102s to the Bryston -- that kind of pep and superficial stimulation, but with real naturalness, timbral accuracy and involvement. Presence factor high. Oh, by the way, would not go the direction of the Plinius 300 -- did everything fairly right except you lost the performers -- they left the room -- put the 102s back, and they're there again -- the difference was instantaneously realized, only spent about very limited time with the 300 -- whatever else it offered, wasn't worth that sacrifice....
I think the best synergy with Montana's are Peter's own amps and Pass. I loved the X350.5 with my EPS2's.
Oh, also never settled on a pre that I could recommend with the Plinius amps -- I had probably about ten to fifteen Plinius amps over a few years (The Odeon is a killer multi, I forgot to mention), but now have sold them all off.

As I say, I sort of settled on the Mac sound as foundation for my system. One reason being the other amps I had were more compatible with that flavor -- there was no resolving Plinius and Macs in the same seven channel system.

Just to let you know how out of control I got, I had two 102s driving the rear channels, one for the center, and two 250s running the fronts, an Odeon in there at one point....pared back since then, but the obsession can grip you.....but if you don't know that already, you will find out, or NOT, if you exercise some restraint (I had none) -- I think you might be doing as well as you can with the two 102s, so no need to go bonkers trying to improve upon that......