General Asylum: REVIEW: Acurus A100 Amplifier (SS) by Dave Z

I purchased this after listening to some high-current amps in the 50-60 wpc range (bryston 2B, Goldman Job) and larger amps by Rotel (RB991) and McIntosh (MC162).

The higher output amp I preferred was the McIntosh - the Rotel caused discomfort at even moderate listening levels. I could feel pressure in my ears, bordering on pain. Not sure what it was - low-freq distortion maybe? The Mac, on the other hand, put out no such uncomfortable sensations - just a easy sounding musicality. But above my budget. This via a Adcom GFP750 preamp, passive mode (which I prefer), midrange Martin Logans.

I did more research, saw the Acurus specs and feared the sensitivity would not match with a passive preamp. And off to my hifi store I went once again, assuming I could afford a nice sounding 50-watter. The dealer demod the Bryston, which was clean - no discomfort, but seemed a bit slow. Also little low-end. Then he demod the Goldman. Ouch, pure pain, worse than the Rotel. Very fast, edgy amp with powerfully precise bass, but painful. I complained.

Then he trotted out the acurus. Plugged it in. Ahh, relief: sounded musical, like the McIntosh (though not as detailed by a good margin). Not as detailed as the goldman, not quite the resolution in the mids as the bryston but good, solid bass, liquid mids & highs. And did not hurt my ears. This through the GFP750 & B&W Matrix speakers.

Brought home, plugged in my Vandersteen 1Cs, old NAD integrated as a preamp (waiting on my passive), and trusty Fl8300 cd changer. Ah, nice. Wow, did not know the Vandys had that much low end! (My room is pretty large, YMMV). No pain, even cranked, unlike the old NAD. Low levels, the bass was still there, articulation very nice. It's no McIntosh, but for $2500 less, I can live with it for a while.

REVIEW: Acurus A100 Amplifier (SS) Review by Dave Z at Audio Asylum