Mark Levinson 331 or McCormack .5 Rev. A

....should have added that the DNA-2DX is a true powerhouse-- 600wpc into 4 ohms, and 1200 into 2 ohms. The 331 has great bass, but the 2DX has more natural bass. Craig.

Hi Jla; I've owned the DNA.5, DNA-1DX, and DNA-2DX, and I auditioned, in home ,the ML 331 for a week. I clearly preferred any of the McCormack amps, although I have not heard an up-graded DNA amp. I do intend to have my DNA.5 upgraded though. In my system, the ML 331 produced a huge but un-natural sound stage that I did not like. Also music had less "body", ie the 331 was very "airy and transparent" but lacked focus. Again, I preferred the McCormacks with my Vandersteen 3Asigs. I think it was a system mis-match thing. The DNA-2DX is a GREAT amp-- best of the bunch, but I have not heard the upgrades-- from what I've read, they too are supposed to be great. I'd up-grade the DNA-.5, and if you don't like it, then sell it. BTW, the DNA-2DX can often be found used for about the same price as the 331. It is dual mono, 300 wpc @ 8 ohms and weighs about what a 331 does, and I consider the DNA-2DX much more musical than the 331. The 2DX may be balanced too (but I'd have to check-- I use it single ended). It does have good bi-wireable output posts. Good Luck. Craig.

Hi John; The 331 actually runs pretty cool-- Don't remember about use of banana plugs though. Re: Chuck's comments on the 331. I shouldn't have made it sound like I was bashing the 331, which I didn't intend to. The 331 is a beautiful well built amp, but in my system, the McCormacks were just more musical. At the time I had a Sony XA7 CD player, Muse Model Two DAC, SF Line 2 pre-amp, and very good Syn. Res. ICs and spkr. cables. As I now have ML 37 transport and 360S DAC, the 331 may work better, but I'm so happy with the DNA-2DX that I'm not motivated to try anything else. Hopefully you can audition the 331 and let your ears be the judge. Cheers. Craig.