Musical Fidelity A3.2pre/power vs 308 intergrated

I would be interested if anyone has had a chance to compare these 2. The A3.2pre/power costs about 10% more then the 308 intergrated and is the companies entry level system while the 308 is supposedly their higher end system. I would prefer an intergrated, and if it costs less and sounds better then the pre/power combo, then it is a win win situation for me. However, if the pre/power sounds significantly better, I would consider that route. I have been listening to the A3.2 intergrated and will get a demo A3.2pre/power soon, but getting the chance to audition a 308 might be difficult.
I have compared them and I clearly prefer the 308 integrated. It is more tubelike in the mids and a little more 3 dimentional in presentation. It has loads of bass slam along with a killer high end. The 308 is $400.00 less than the 3.2 amp and preamp (plus the cost of a quality cable) and has 20 watts per channel more. Into 4 ohms the 308 delivers over 300 watts. I think the 308 Integrated is the best value in their entire line. Wally
A308 integrated has 48 amp peak to peak current. >100dB S/N ratio. Channel separation >70 dB.

A3.2cr has 72 amp peak to peak current. >120 dB S/N ratio. Channel separation >89 dB.

So measurements for power amp ALONE look better than the 308
Wel, I am going to try and answer my own question. The MF 3.2 pre/power that I listened to had several hundred hours on it whereas the A308 had less then 100 hours. The biggest difference was that the 3.2 combo was very clean, clear and detailed,especially in the highs, but kind of thin sounding. The A308 had a fuller sound, especially in the mids but lacked the clarity and detail of the 3.2 combo. I am a bit surprised by the results. Reviews on the A308 rave about the clean clear highs but I didn't hear this. Could it be that the A308 needs more hours before the sound starts to open up? Alternatively, I am in a older building with not the best wiring and the area where I live suffers from irregular power. Are the differences that I am hearing due to the choke regulators on the 3.2 and could this be improved with a power conditioner? I would really like to get the fullness of the A308 together with the clarity/detail of the 3.2 combo.
I once owned a B-1. I used it in conjunction with a vandersteen sub(2W) and a pair of Spica TC-50's.The amp(integrated)delivered only 35watts,but the sound was first rate.I know this isn't what you were asking but what the heck.
Where did you hear the two M-F's? In the same store?

You could try an audio magic stealth conditioner. They retail for $700-800 but one of the audiogon dealers (Symphony of Sound ???) has the mini for $500. This is one of the best you can buy. Although I have not heard many but most people here will agree.

Power hash usually shows on the highs. So you could be right.

M-F literature describes the 308 as sounding more like a tube amp than a tube amp. Also says top end is smooth and sweet, NOT clear.

Can a fuller sound also be more clear? I don't know.
NOTE: A 308 also has "full choke regulation". I quote:

"Very clean power supply lines and immunity from mains borne interference"
I was able to bring each systems home over a weekend to listen. My base comparisons are with a MF 3.2 intergrated. The 3.2 pre/power sound similar to the 3.2 intergrated only a lot better (surprise!), cleaner, clearer, more detail, better sound stage, bass etc.. but same basic sound. The A308 is more like the 3.2 intergrated in terms of detail and clarity, but with much richer mids, unlike either of the 3.2s.
Does the A308 really have choke regulation? In the MF reference guide it says it does, but not on their web-site, and in a review in Hi-Fi News they make the point of saying it does not have choke regulation. You would think if it did, it what have 'CR' on the front panel. When I bring the demos back on tues, I will ask if I could do a quick comparison between the two amps using their power conditioner and see if that makes a difference.
Mike, you mention that the A308 had less then 100 hours on it. I have a MF A300 and I found that this amp required a minmuim of 100 hours - to sound like it was starting to loosen up. I have heard from other MF owners that this is normal. Anyway, let us know how the demo goes and which system you choose.
To follow up, I wasn't getting the kind of helpful response from the stereo shop that I was hoping for. I am convinced that the A308 would sound better with more hours burn time but they weren't too keen on working with me on that. Instead I was told my speakers (Dynaudio 1.3 mkII) were the problem and I need to upgrade to B&Ws. Hmmm.... Anyways, I ended up buying a used M3 nu-vista off this site for less than a new A3.2pre/power and what a great decision! I am now getting the sound I was looking for and then some. Thanks for all the help, but enough of the computer stuff, I have some listening to do. :)
After borrowing those MF amps from a store for a weekend home demo, you bought on line?! I bet the people at the store are less than happy about that. And people wonder why some stores are reluctant to do at home evaluations...
That store has already received some good business from me (CD player,phono stuff, misc stuff etc). If I had gone and bought the same amp on-line that I demoed, then your point is well taken. The amps I demoed were NOT what I was looking for and the store didn't have anything else in my price range that interested me. Are you suggesting I should have just bought a multi thousand dollar piece of equipment from them anyways, even if I wasn't happy with it? Would you do that?