Adcom 565 pre-amp fit here?

I would very much appreciate opinions on utilizing an Adcom 565 pre-amp in the following system:

NAD 512 (CD source)
Sony 360 (DVD source - just stereo)
Acurus A250 (amp)
B&W DM100 (speakers - been using them since the 80's)
Audioquest Type4 (speaker wire)
Audioquest Ruby (interconnect)

The system is apartment based - primarily music, with stereo movie viewing.
Really anxious to replace a Carver C-1 pre-amp!

I've always felt the speakers were pretty clean, the Acurus just a tad forward in the highs, and the NAD a bit warm and mellow... Thoughts?

Thank you
One of my preamps is a Adcom 565. This amp is extremely qiet and quite neutral. I have found the better the interconnect the better it sounds. If your power amps are hard sounding you will hear it. It's biggest failing is it soundstage depth isn't very deep. Soundstage width and attack are there. Also it sounds better in the bypass mode. I've used it in a single and bi-amped system.
I have used a 565 with both a Bryston 3B-NRB and a B&K ST-140, in the bypass mode, which is by far the best sounding. I agree with the less than stellar depth of soundstage, but the pre really shines in all other parameters. The interconnect used will make a big difference...I used DH Labs with excellent results. If you can get if for $350 or less, give it a try. At this price, you will be able to get your money back out of it without any trouble whatsoever...provided it doesn't give you the sound you're looking for. I'd try it with both of your amps, but suspect combined with the Acurus Audio and the right interconnect that the combo will be quite good for the money.
I owned an Adcom 565 some years back (then used in a system with with a Golden Tube SE-40 amp, JMLab Daline 3.1 speakers, Kimber PBJ and 4TC, various cd players, Linn Axix tt) and found that things opened up quite dramatically when I got rid of the Adcom and switched to a Melos (tube) preamp. The 565 has been favorably reviewed, but I found it to be flat and not very musically satisfying in my system. 'Have to think one could do alot better for marginally more $$$ used, and if it were me I'd also check out the AES/Cary AE-3 kit. "just my 2 cents"
Thanks for the opinions on the Adcom, but how do you feel it would match with my CD, amp, and speakers? In other words, maybe a good fit/looks like a bad fit... Unfortunately, I can't audition it. But it's a good price and I've long thought it may be a good addition to my budget system.

And, you'd prob pick an Adcom 565 pre over a Carver C-1 pre right?
I have owned the 565 and used it with satisfactory results. The line stage in the bypass mode is by far the better options. The line stage is good, but what made this a great value was the phono stage. However, this appears to be a non-issue with you. I found it to work well with A.Q. cables. As stated above, it should be a fine match with your 250. I not familar with the all of the variables you have presented and it may be difficult to find someone who has heard this combination as a total system, but in the $ range you are discussing this pre-amp shines above many others. I would highly recommend it unless you are willing to pay more.
I have a similar system to yours and just dug my 565 back out of my closet and put it back into my system and I don't know what I was thinkig before. The pre amp is amazing,but it is a crime not to connect a turntable to it even a cheap one will sound fantastic.I have used the exact same wire,the type 4 and the rubys with great results as well but the aq inter connects can be a little too forward and overly revealing at times.I like the smoothness of the monster 350Is.It is their full range single winding design so the time correctness is more superior to their multiple winding design in my opinion...more neutral and laid back than the rubys you might think you have lost some of the magic at first but you wont experience as much listener fatigue if you know what I mean and if you are using thost cables with that preamp you will.
I recently acquired a second-hand 565 pre-amp for my second system, but have been using it in my main system lately. It's a very good preamp, and the one I have has plenty of depth. Neutral, inoffensive, dynamics are fine. Frankly, I don't see much of an advantage to spending more money on a preamp. I was using an Audible Illusions M3a, with recently renewed tubes, and I don't miss it at all.

If interconnects make any difference at all, the Ruby might be a little closed in, muffled, compared to more expensive AQ cables or the very reasonably priced DH Labs budget interconnect. If the Acurus is bright or forward, the Ruby might do well between the 565 and the amp.