Moon North Collection Versus Pass Labs X350 - Which would have that liquid sound?

@mgrif104 can you tell me please what your other system is?

@dman777 

Both of my systems are in my virtual system profile but can summarize: Both are anchored by the HV series of T+A DACs, where my primary system has a separate T+A preamp, the second has the preamp built in - very similar function to the North 891 but a price point up from the Sim unit. The amplifiers in my primary system are Atma-Sphere Class D monos.

To clarify - I love the sonics I’m getting out of my gear, but the North units would have been simpler, less expensive (except for the Class D monos), come with a much better remote, and sonically darn close.

I have the Moon 761/791 with Transparent super cables and Sonus Faber Sonetta V speakers. I love the Moon products and sound. If I had to upgrade anything it's definitely would be upgrading my speakers. The 861/891 is better, but the cost difference in my opinion does not justify moving up.

@dman777 

Not sure what your definition of liquid sound is. Is it warmth or is it the euphonic sweet, silky type of sound. If it’s the latter I don’t know if either Pass or Moon fit that description. 

I’ll give it a shot so you can decide if it’s helpful or not…

I’ve owned X250.5 driven by ARC tube preamps, XA30.8/XP-22 and X260.8 mono amps with XP-22 and test drove ARC Ref6 with the X260.8 for a couple of weeks.

The Class A XA is the warmest and the mellowest sounding with somewhat wooly bass and paints the soundstage with a really big brush. Very pleasant sound if that’s what you’re after.
The X260.8 monos are much tighter, have more control and more bite with better instrument separation and better details. Still warm sounding and has the typical Pass Labs homogeneous sound signature that makes everything sound good. It won’t render a lot of recordings unlistenable. It will not be analytical sounding and won’t be very exciting sounding either. The X350.8 will most likely adhere to the same general sonic principles. 
The XP-22 preamp is excellent. I couldn’t really decide between the ARC Ref6 and XP-22 as both were extremely capable. I stayed with XP-22 as to me it portraits the recording more accurately than the larger than life presentation of Ref 6 which is amazing in its own way. I’d be happy with either but I already owned the 22 and decided to stick with it at the time.

I no longer have the Pass stack as I simplified my system quiet a bit. I’m running a Boulder 866 integrated now. There’s not been a day when I caught myself thinking man it would be nice to have that Pass stack now. No…I kind grew tired of the homogenous presentation after years of owning that gear  

Have not heard Moon North so can’t really speak to it.

As @audiopacer stated, Pass amps run hot. Not an issue in a large air conditioned room but you will feel it. 

@audphile1 Thank you for the info... wow, that is quite story.  This is a big jump (downsize) to a Boulder intergrated. How come you didn’t go half way instead and just a Boulder pre-amp and a single Boulder stereo amp? 

Do you think you will ever move back to seperates? even it is just a preamp and stereo amp? 

The liquid sound I am describing... this sounds a bit bizzare but the cheaper Yamaha rn-2000a had it. It sounded so good. It was just to low-fi for what I want (power, seperates, etc). I try using it a preamp to the Moon 861 but it has really low gain and makes the Moon sound a bit muddy. 

I went to a hifi shop yesterday and I listened to the Accuphase P-4600 stereo amp with it’s matching preamp (forgot what model) on Vandersteen speakers. I was not impressed. It didn’t have the liquid sound I like or anything close. I think partially it is becuase of the speakers. Sometime later, I plan on brining in my Focal Sopra n1 speakers to give the Accuphase a second listen.