Boulder amps v,s Levinson amps

Thats very interesting,be sure and keep us informed of any changes.

and the price differential is?

generally components that impress initally, fall out of favor in time. neutrality is not dynamic and most essential recordings are not life-like. listen longer to the tone and weight of the music as a whole , and don't use so-called reference recordings. both of these brands are nice, but the sonic personality of the levinson is more conservative.

Hi, I wonder if Madrigal is capable to design an amplifier that is as good as a Boulder. Does anyone know how the Boulder sounds compared with FM Acoustics?

Having heard the Boulder 1060 against both a a pair of 436 ML monoblocks and also the 33Hs I would take the Boulder over the 436s as it portrays the music in a much more uncoloured light, where the ML adds something to the mix, a slight warmth which I try to avoid, knowing the capabilities of my front end, I want the signal to be amplified not distorted tonally in any way. The 33Hs gave it a good run for the money but again I would sway to the 1060, for the same but less obvious reasoning. Partnered with either of the Boulder pre-amps things get even better.

One of my customers in Atlanta has a lot of experience with Boulder amps. He reports that they are very dynamic, with clean bass. I'll try to get detailed info on the one in question from him next time we talk. FWIIW, he is not fond of their preamps; a sentiment that I have heard from many other sources.

Ask Hifi Knopf in Düsseldorf. He carries Boulder and a lot of other exotic stuff. To him Boulder produces by far the best amps money can buy.

Hi,I have compared these two Amps and the Boulder is definately a cut above the ML336,the bass on the Boulder is very sharp and defined and also the Boulder is more transparent.The Levinson 336 has a very powerfull sound but is also very unreliable,surge resistors can blow at power up.

Anybody who is up to buying a Boulder power amp must be aware that boulders are not speaker friendly amps. A friend who has boulder 2010/1050 combination had to buy Mcintosh mc 275/Leben for Kharma speakers(the one second most expensive in reference range.)

Rubbish. I've run Boulder 1050s with my Kharma speakers for a few years and moved up to the 2060 about 3 years ago. One Boulder-Kharma combination is one if the most neutral and transparent pairing you can get today. Your friend probably had a problem specific to him/his ears.

http://www.nonamehifi.com/ContentDetails.php?CID=3&ID=4522&arc=0

The link of friends setup. Being most neutral and transparent pairing will not guarantee musical satisfaction. This guy has replaced grand utopia with Kharma Exquisite Midi. I can't agree with you. Someone who claims kharma plus Boulder equals sonic heaven has some serious problem in hearing and analyzing what heard. Sorry.

More rubbish from you unfortunately.

www.nonamehifi.com/ContentDeta...

The link of friends setup. Being most neutral and transparent pairing will not guarantee musical satisfaction. This guy has replaced grand utopia with Kharma Exquisite Midi. I can't agree with you. Someone who claims kharma plus Boulder equals sonic heaven has some serious problem in hearing and analyzing what heard. Sorry.

Your friend is obviously looking for a euphonic sound that he can't get from a very neutral system. Thats your friend's fault, not a fault of the system or components.

As for guaranteed musical satisfaction, no one is guarantee'ing anything, just disputing your nonsensical post about Boulder amps.

Even Kharma's own showrooms are outfitted with Boulder amps. See for yourself.
Kharma showroom

I rest my case.

I can tell you as I own Boulder 2060 - no contest with many amps out there, from Classe CAM600 and Cary 211FE and MAC 601, all of which were compared in detail by me. 

I have not yet heard an ML, and while good, I would have a heard time believing it hurts the big Boulders.