Kharma 3.2 to MidiGrand Upgade???

I would like to pose some questions to any 3.2 owners out there.Do any of you have any thoughts on amps like the Cary 805 or Canary 339 driving these babies?also any thoughts on something like a CAT preamp/with built in phonostage here?When I look at those combinations they seem very viable as compared to the fabulous,yet expensive Lamm stuff.

I've tried a few preamp/amp combinations but none of those mentioned. Pre's have included ARC Ref 2 Mk.II, Joule LA-150 and Lamm L2. Amps have been Bryston, Plinius (while waiting for Joule Grand Marquis), Grand Marquis and Lamm ML-1.1.

IMO, the Kharma's can sound fabulous with a variety of less expensive electronics. Of course, if you want to extract EVERYTHING they are capable of you'll have to pay accordingly.

Ultimately, I chose the Lamm combo but the Joule set-up was a very close second.

BTW, I have the sub haven't found any integration problems at all. The sound is quite magical.

Maybe this truly great speaker doesn't get the rave postings anymore because it's getting "long in the tooth" and isn't the speaker du jour. Let's hope Kharma doesn't do anything to it's design for the sake of marketing.

IMO, the Kharma's can sound fabulous with a variety of less expensive electronics. Of course, if you want to extract EVERYTHING they are capable of you'll have to pay accordingly.

I share the same sentiments although we seem to be the minority. Most people think that SOTA associated gear is a must with speakers as revealing as the 3.2s, but when I first got the speakers, the speakers cost double the combined cost of my associated gear! It sounded pretty good to my ears. Of course hifi is all relative and subsequent upgrades have been upgrades. The Kharmas are speakers that makes you think that speakers are the most important. The 3.2s are suppose to be limited edition though.

I'll add my 2-cents about solid-state amps with 3.2s. I have an Edge NL12 driving them (& the Meitner DCC2/CDSD combo) with, to my ears, wonderfully compelling results. The bass & lower midrange areas that can sound punchy & pushy & fatiguing on many other highly acclaimed speakers I have heard &/or owned have absolute control on the 3.2s in my system. The bass is also completely integrated. It seems that the magic to the bass is the cabinet, which routes the bass to the rear ports, that seem to act like virtual woofers, but with a very natural presentation. There is a lifelike quality rivaled, in my experience, only by Apogee ribbons (my old Stages, in particular). It is a sound that just sinks into your soul. The mids/highs are at once silky but have body & depth. And there is that often-noted Kharma disappearing act that is better, I think, than other transparent speakers like Audio Physic. They make my smallish room sound much bigger & grander than it is. The 3.2s may be one of those miracle design accidents that come along once in a long, long while. (On this solid state tangent, I heard very fine results with larger pair of Kharma Ceramiques at GTT driven by a Nagra solid state amp). So, if you are not into tubes for whatever reason, don't think you cannot enjoy the 3.2s.

Rgs92,very astute points,and well received.As a matter of fact there may, or may not, be a marketing ploy at work biasing some to only use tubes.I have heard GREAT set-ups with both topologies.As for the Kharma stuff,I have a dear friend with a Ceramique model 1 driven by a Rowland 8t.I really have to admit that,even though I have loved these speakers driven by tubed stuff,he REALLY gets a FANTASTIC sound.I,TRULY,would never know whether they were solid state or tubes if I didn't know better.Fuel for thought!By the way,the bass response from this set-up is SOTA,but,there really is something to the sound of those little 3.2's that I can't shake.I guess it's true,"I like it,and like it alot".