I have done a direct comparison. I agree with the prior post. The SF is neutral and clean and the BAT was dynamic and allowed the music to "pulse" through it, but the SF was dynamic as well and had a great clarity and soundstage. Overall I passed over the BAT because I did not think it sounded "better" than the SF, and the dealer was very arrogant, snooty, and would be upset when I played non-classical music through the BAT. In the end he was not willing to come below "list" price, yet the SF is available for around $2000 (over $1,000 below "list" price) here and elsewhere on the web, so was a good bargain over the BAT. I listened to a friend's SF and did not think that the sonic differnces justified one over the other, and in view of the fact that you can get a good price for the SF, I felt better about the SF. Both are fully balanced designs, both have remote controls, both have overbuilt power supplies, both have balanced ins and outs. The sound is slightly different, but I do love the SF sound. I upgraded the tubes and its incredible! That's just my opinion and I do not regret it. As an aside I will note that I did in fact buy the BAT VK-200 amplifier from that dealer because I was totally impressed by the huge soundstage, dynamic range, and presentation. I did not geta huge discount but I didn't care! Nothing else came close (Krell, Classe, Meridian, NAD, Rotel) I thought it was awesome so sucked it up for once and what the hey, I had the extra cash from my preamp decision. So that is how things worked out and that is what my SF Line 2 is connected to right now. Good luck!