NAD S200 vs. McCormack DNA125

I have a pair of Vandersteen 3A Signatures. My listening room is small (25 X 13) and I listen at moderate levels. I have heard good things about the Vandersteen/McCormack pairing, but I'm also a big fan of NAD. I have the opportunity to buy a used S200 or a used DNA-125. A DNA 225 is too expensive. The pre-amp and cables will also be upgraded, but I don't know to what. Source is NAD 720.
I also like NAD,but its a McCormack I would buy in your moccasins.Great upgrade paths also,Bob
The McCormack.

Go with the McCormack and then have it upgraded when you have some spare cash. A very good amp becomes a great amp!
In your position I'd definitely go for the McCormack DNA-125. If you can find a McCormack DNA-0.5 with the Rev. A mod. from Steve McCormack that would be a great amp to build around or even just a stock DNA 1.0.
Thank you all. Six unanimous opinions is enough to make a decision.
I purchased a preowned DNA-1 Dlx a while back and have been so happy I chucked my NAD preamp and tracked down a TLC-1 Dlx passive pre.

Nice comination. . . .but now I feel I need to upgrade my speakers. . .

You won't go wrong with McCormack
The wise money is also the unanimous pick here. Get the McCormack. Get the upgrades, too. I did the Platinum upgrades on my DNA-225 and it is one of the finest amps I've heard, at any price.
Another thing about the McCormack, if you need more power in the future the amp can be converted to mono and you could buy another.