What're the sonic differences between Bryston and McCormack?

95bcwh · « **on:** 23 Jan 2006, 07:39 am »

Dear all,
I really don't want to turn this into a "which amp is better" debate. What I really hope to find out is, has anyone here ever compare any Bryston power amp with the equivalent match up from McCormack? If so, can anyone share with me what you feel are the sonic differences between the two? It seems like both company has equivalent match up in several categeries, e.g.

2B-SST/3B-SST vs DNA 125
4B-SST vs DNA 225
6B-SST vs DNA 500

Of course, McCormack's warranty is no way comparable to Bryston's, but then, who else can beat Bryston on after sale services?

Thanks and best regards
RV

jermmd · « **Reply #1 on:** 23 Jan 2006, 05:43 pm »

I think George (Zybar) has heard both pretty extensively. He owns the McCormack DNA 500 and thinks it's one of the best. I recall him commenting in other threads that he didn't like the Brystons because of weak bass extension (I think). Hopefully he'll comment (or you could PM him).

FWIW, I have the McCormack based on what I heard at George's house. I have heard Brystons in the past but I haven't done any critical listening. Bryston obviously has a superb reputation and the best warranty.

Levi · « **Reply #2 on:** 23 Jan 2006, 07:03 pm »

Quote from: 95bcwh

Dear all,
I really don't want to turn this into a "which amp is better" debate. What I really hope to find out is, has anyone here ever compare any Bryston power amp with the equivalent match up from McCormack? If so, can anyone share with me what you feel are the sonic differences between the two? It seems like both company has equivalent match up in several categeries, e.g.

2B-SST/3B-SST vs DNA 125
4B-SST vs DNA 225
6B-SST vs DNA 500

Of course, McCormack's warranty ...

I think the 6B-SST is a three channel. You probably want to compare the 14B-SST instead.

95bcwh · « **Reply #3 on:** 23 Jan 2006, 07:34 pm »

oops..sorry.. thanks for the catch

95bcwh · « **Reply #4 on:** 23 Jan 2006, 07:38 pm »

Jermmd,
Thanks...I have spoken to George. He did tell me that he didn't like Bryston, he used the analogy to some people like Ford car, some like Honda. He says Bryston just doesn't sound compelling to him, but he say that's his personal taste, there could be many people who think otherwise. Hence I am trying to seek feedback from the rest of the people too.

Thanks and best regards!

Karsten · « **Reply #5 on:** 23 Jan 2006, 08:46 pm »

I had a guy over not too long ago with a Bryston 4BSST, we compared it with the Belles 350 Ref. The most notisable difference was on crash cymbals which the Belles did a lot better, sound staging was a little better on the Belles as well. I have yet to audition the McCormack amplifiers, so I cannot compare to these.

Brg,
Karsten

Levi · « **Reply #6 on:** 24 Jan 2006, 04:56 am »

The 14B-SST should sound pretty good way better than the 4B-SST. I would go with the 7B-SST for 2ch music listening.

fld · « **Reply #7 on:** 26 Jan 2006, 01:15 am »

I had mccormack dna 0.5 rev b then Rev A from steve himself for a number years and just recently acquired a 3bst and 3bsst.

The mccormack and bryston are two different amps. They both have strengths and weaknesses just like all other things.

Mccormack is very good at the highs and mids. Its tube like, sweet, detailed and very musical. However the bass is not quite as potent as the 3bsst or the 3bst. It can be soft sounding. More laidback.

The Brystons have very clean sound, bass is very powerful. Can drive more difficult speakers than the Mccormack. However its not as tubey or as sweet as the Mccormack. The sound is more frontal than the Mccormack. In a way, the Brystons sounds a little dry compared to the "wetter" sound , tube like of the Mccormack.

Different speakers react to different amps, therefore I have both because some speakers like the Brystons more, while others prefer the McCormack.