Thanks for the responses. Yes I am relying on memory and the set up before was completey different. But....the sound is way different. So I don't think it's the room, components, wiring, etc...I think I'm trying to identify how to describe what I liked about the Adcom better. For example, the crunched guitars sounded much more pronounced. I think, in retrospect, it was a much "dirtier" sound. That have been what I liked. So would that sound be more related to better mids? It seems like to top is so soft on the Aragon. Almost like that part of the music that I liked isn't there anymore. Again, going from memory. The cd's I listen to are the exact same in most cases so I don't think it's the recording. Although the issue of loudness is interesting. I write and record music for fun and understand the concepts of compression, but never really thought of it that way. Most of what I record is electronic so I don't think compression plays the same role as live recordings, but I could be wrong. I guess it depends on the quality of the samples or plugin you're using.
why don't I like it??
My setup right now is Aragon 2004 mkII, Klipsch kg3.5's, and a yamaha rxv-659. My old roommate had an Adcom gfa-5400 and I loved it. When we separated, I wanted another amp. I did my research and decided on the Aragon. I know the Aragons have a great rep, but I'm just not impressed. I've owned it now for several years and it's never quite grown on me. I love it for ht though, which is the reason why I still own it. Being married with kids changes how you use your system--ie., can't jam out to music all the time!! I think the problem might stem from the kind of music I like--rock. The crunched guitars sounded so much better with the Adcom. It might be the Aragon is too "clean". While in a different room set up, I swear the Adcom had much better detail and imaging I've had the Aragon in two different room setups and nothing really changed. What do you think?