that the MA-1 MkII.x is shortly to become the MkIII. Are there other than cosmetic differences between the MkII.3 and the MkIII version of this wonderful amplifier? If so, is there or will there be an upgrade path from the MkII.2 to the MkIII? To return to the original purpose of this post, can anyone comment on subjective differences between his or her MA-1 MkII.2's and the MkII.3 upgrade they've had applied? Ralph or his copywriter says that the .3 version is "smoother". I'm not sure what this means in the context of an amplifier that's so incredibly resolving yet absolutely "unharsh". It makes one wonder if the resolution is now somehow lessened, or if the breathtaking transient attack has been softened -- in short, if the character of the amplifier is now more conventionally "tubelike". If so, then, no thanks! I fell in love with an Audio Research VT-100 once and pretty much felt that I'd have to finally ditch my solid-state gear and buy one, but then I heard a pair of M-60's. I still remember how I felt they combined the uncanny imaging, transparency, and air of really good tube gear with lightning speed and crisp resolution of great transistor gear, but without *any* annoying distortion or unnaturalness. Actually, more accurately, that's what I thought a little later. At first I just stood with my mouth hanging slightly agape while I listened. I bought a pair of MA-1 MkII.2's a month later -- a three-month-old pair being sold by someone who'd had to upgrade to MA-2's to power his WATT Puppy's and heat his house.
Anyway, I really don't want to impart *any* amount of letharic tubiness to my MA-1's. Can anyone comment?
Thanks!
--
Chris
