Rowland 8TiHC vs. Lamm M1.1

I own a Roland 8T and althou it sounds exquisite I understand that the iHC version has sgnificant sonic improvements. However since Rowland will not upgrade the 8T into it's iHC version I would have to sell and buy to upgrade. Because of this I am also considering the Lamms M1.1 of which I have only heard praises. In addition they are very often mached with the Verity Parsifals wich I am geting pretty soon. What do you think about how these two beasts compare? Has anyone had the chance to audition both of them? I use a Wadia 861 directly into the amp., cabling is XLO Signature.
I don't think you will go wrong either way as both are excellent. I have spent alot of time w/Rowlands but with different speakers and they are very fine. I own Lamm ML-1's and have heard them with the Verity and this is a great and popular match. Yours ears and personal taste will ultimately tell you what is best for you.
Jmr, I am also considering a Lamm 1.1 or a Rowland 8TiHc. Recently I have been also looking at the MC6 by Rowland. It allows you to vertical bi-amp and gives you an 8Ti in a more flexible package. Has anybody heard anything about the MC6 - good or bad? I think Glide is right - they are both great amps. Glide could describe a little bit the sound of each amp. Is the Lamm significantly different sounding than Rowlands?
Forget the amps. Go back to third grade english.
Chriskh - Yes. Please do excuse my english. It was late at night when I posted and half a sleep.
Dan, just ignore this Chriskh guy. The MC6 is what Rowland is trying to push, however there are a couple of things I dislike. The MC6 does'nt have the gain selector switch that models 8 have. I find this specially usefull since I run my Wadia directly into the amp.,if you use a preamp this should'nt be a concern. Also I ca'nt help thinking that all those speakers posts and all the internal bridging which very usefull for multichannel aplications may represent sonic compromises when it comes to stereo use.
Jmr, You made an interesting observation about the MC6. One thing that JRDG mentioned over the phone was the reason why the 8TiHC sounds better than the 8Ti is that there are more output devices and so each device is less "stressed." I believe (I need to clarify this with JRDG) the MC6 has the same number of output devices as the 8TiHC. If you are correct in your argument then the 8TiHC should sound better than the MC6 in a two-channel application. I am not sure if the 8Ti would sound better than the MC6. I am guessing, but I bet they would sound very similar. The MC6, 8Ti and the 8TiHC all share the same power supply. Cheers, Dan
Dan, you are right in that the three should have a similar character in their sound. But remember that in this hobby even small improvements cost a lot of $. I would be caution about JRDG answer to your inquiries, I think that the MC6 is more a product of a marketing strategy than of true sonic improvement. That may be also why the denial to further upgrade the 8T. In my opinion a poor strategy, I think Rowland users had a great product loyalty in part because JRDG also was loyal to them. That appears to be changing. Anyway in my case I've decide to go the Lamm way.I am getting a pair of M1.1 next week, I'll let you know how it goes. Regards,Jose.
Jose, Good luck with the Lamms. I would be very interested to hear your opinions about them. Later this year I will be in the same boat you are now - trying to decide between these two amps and possibly others. Please keep us posted. Cheers, Dan