Marsh or McCormack

I have some B&W speakers. I'm looking at either the Marsh MSD-A400s or the McCormack DNA225. Any thoughts? The Marsh seems to be getting a lot of good press lately. I believe the McCormack amp might cost a few hundred bucks more, but not enough to make a huge difference.
I have own the McCormack DNA 225 amp, it is an excellent ss design from a well established company(currently owned by Conrad and Johnson). Build quality is excellent with quality parts. I haven't heard the Marsh amps but they have received excellent reviews in The Absolute Sound. If you have the chance listen to both in your system. I don't think you could go wrong with either one but I bought the McCormack based on sound, company reputation, dealer network and support. Good luck.
Listen to both if possible.
I would take the TAS Marsh review with a grain of salt (tho they also reviewed and were impressed by the McC) as they have also raved about products in the past designed by Marsh that I thought were disappointing, like the Monster power conditioner. Marsh used to work for TAS.
I'm not really suggesting an consistent editorial bias, just be aware that rave reviews are not a good enough reason to buy an amp.
I'll continue to promote the virtues of the McCormack DNA-225. Oodles of CLEAN, QUICK power. Can't speak to the Marsh, but if you've narrowed it down to these two amps I know you like the 225.
I don't have a comparison between those two, but I was in a shop that carried McCormack and Linn, I compared the 225 with the Linn AV-5125, it's a 5 channel amp. They were very close in sonic signature on the system I played them on. I had a couple tracks I was playing, my wife liked both on the Linn and I liked one on the Linn and one on the 225. All that tells you nothing as a comparison between the two in question...but I thought I would share my experience.

I can't give much info outside of this as I wasn't familiar with the system they were used with.
B&W will give you a good sound, depending on placement, and room conditions. But no equipment can improve the source material.

The gear, and especially tweaks, are of little consquence until that is maximized. The gear is way less significant, and tweaks are still of little consquence.

Specs for a good amp:
Distortion: <1%
Damping: >20
Watts: what the speakers need
Verify inversion non-inversion in your system

Then pick the gear that looks good in your system, and color coordinate adequate cables from the many there are to choose from.

The rest is primarily phycho-acoustic game playing and hair splitting.
I own a Marsh A400 and really value it in my system. It is very revealing of that which is in front of it. The charachter of the amp is very neutral with a huge and deep soundstage and exceptionally solid base. I have never been able to get this amp to strain even in my large room. It likes balanced tube preamps like the BAT's and cable choice is extremely important. I use the balanced inputs. I have had great luck with Harmonic Technology, Synergistic Research, and Sonoran interconnects in combination with Monster Sigma II speaker cable. The only fault I have found is an occasional glare in the upper midrange....but my room tends to slightly emphasize this frequency range. All in all, the Marsh is a bargain for the price and the amp I prefer to listen to after trying amps of all different stripes and topologies. I still keep a tube amp around for chamber music and baroque listening however. I have not heard the Mc Cormack so I cannot compare. Rest assured that if you go with the Marsh, and if you are patient and willing to change and tweek your system, you will be rewarded with transparent sound.
I share Tacs impressions too. OTH I have good results with my RLD-1 preamplifiers and I'm looking to buy a DNA-125. The DNA-225 has more power but , a friend and owner of a 225, said that the 125 is a more refined version. Either one will be a good buy and Steve is a fantastic guy with a positive atittude to serve his clients.

Homedesign, you're cracking me up to say the least.

For the record, Richard Marsh was the first designer / builder to come up with a preamp that unconditionally passed J. Peter Moncrieff of International Audio Review's ( IAR ) "straight wire bypass" tests. This prototype unit was designed and built in the mid to late 1970's. Whether or not you like the sound of his products that he has recently designed and how well they match with your other components in terms of cosmetics and sonics would strictly be a personal thing.

I think that either amp is well built and well designed. I think that McCormack does some things that are more adventurous and "forward thinking" than any other amp out there. Once again, which one you decide to go with would be a matter of personal taste and system synergy. Sean

PS... don't forget to color coordinate your interconnects with your drapes and carpet for best performance : )