McCormack DNA-500

Is the DNA-500 rather warm sounding or is it qualified as neutral and very detailed. I am leery of harsh high frequencies.

Thank you.
In my system it was neutral from the top down through the midrange. I thought the amp was a little bottom heavy...which many people like. I earlier owned a DNA-2 Platinum revision, which had a similar sonic signature.

The DNA-500 was transparent in the highs, therefore the quality of the highs was dependent on what was upstream.
Awhile back I switched from a Levinson 331 amp to a DNA-500 and it was a huge improvement across the board. I've got Aerial 10T speakers so the additional power of the McCormack really made the 10Ts sing. As Tvad stated... very neutral and very balanced. I found the bass to actually tighten up and deepen -- not heavy at all in my system. But, I think the biggest improvement wrought by the DNA-500 is transient response. Initial pluck of a string, a piano note, or a snare drum rimshot are just far more lifelike.
no mccormick is worries
Interesting and thank you for your responses. The reason for my worries is that I tried a Conrad-Johnson Premier 350 (I currently own a CJ MF2500)and I found the upper frequencies to be fatiguing.
I would be surprised if the McCormack is appreciably different than the CJ350 in the highs.

Perhaps you need to address some other issue in your system.

Otherwise, I would recommend buying a used DNA-500, so it can be resold if necessary without a significant loss.
I'm not sure I would call the DNA 500 warm sounding but
its not cold or clinical sounding either. I really enjoyed
mine. It had great control and still sounded musical. I
found the 500 to be very responsive to power cords. Every
cord I tried made a difference. My personal favorite was
a PAD Dominus.

Good luck
If you find the Conrad Johnson fatiguing you got problems. That is the finest solid state amp on the planet. The Conrad 350 is a much better amp than the Mccormack DNA-500. Good Luck....
I agree that if the CJ350 didn't do it for you, neither will the DNA-500. Did you try the CJ in your system? What are your components & cables? I know my DNA-500 easily conveys upstream changes so I suspect the culprit is likely hiding there.
I have an Accuphase DP-78 fed directly into the amp. My speakers are Sonus Faber Electa Amator. Cables are Audioquest Colorado and Volcano. It sounds very good with the CJ MF2500. I found the Premier 350 to have a bigger stage with much more details and more authority. It sounded very good on excellent recordings. But I find the MF2500 to be smoother, albeit less informative.

The amps you've used and mentioneded are all very good to excellent amps. They're very unlikely to be the source of any harshness. Ever consider adding a tubed preamp into the mix? They normally tame harshness and may solve your issue of fatigue. Good units won't sacrifice the details either. Plus, you could tailor the sound you want by the preamp as well as the tubes you use. Good luck
CD direct into the McCormack DNA-500 may be a VERY bad combination. The input impedance on the DNA-500 is 10k...I would say there aren't many CD players that could drive that load without sonic compromise. Alot of very good tube pre's won't drive that load without sonic penalty.
Mitdking: I'm curious about your statement that the CJ 350 is a much better amp than the McCormack. Both are on my short list for high powered amp (the Pass 350.5 is also on that list), if I choose to go that route. Did you own both? In which ways is th CJ better?