[Carlman]

Does anyone have experience with these and can explain them?  I have a friend looking for a new amp and he and I both are familiar with the reputation of McCormack amps... but I can only find buzz about the DNA-500 which is a LOT more power than he needs...

Has anyone used the DNA-125 or 225... And what's the deal with the .5 signature, 1.0, etc.. ?  Are those different sounding? Older/newer?

Just curious about what the best bang for the buck is... 100wpc is about all he's ever had.. but if a particular amp topology works better than another, that's what we'd like to know.  The .5 and 1.0 certainly look a bit more spartan on the exterior... leading me to believe you'll get better SQ... Am I wrong?

Thanks for any comments.

-C

[TomS]

I would check out www.smcaudio.com or call Steve (great guy).  He also posted a lot of responses on this on AA.  He now designs these for CJ, who owns the name and manufactures them.  SMC mods most of the earlier designs, except for the dna-500, because as he puts it, it includes everything he knows how to do better than the earlier designs (i.e. no mods for it at this time).  It seems that in general you need to get the older ones to the platinum level before they sound close to the 500.  I've heard a dna-500 a couple of times recently and it sounded great, especially at micro dynamics and lower levels so don't let the high power be a limiter.  It's there if you need it and can afford it.  This one's definitely on my short list for new stuff.

[carusoracer]

I'm very interested as well. I heard the DNA 225 (which I was looking at) albeit too briefly. This was in a nice Salon in Birmingham,MI. Driving Vandersteen and Maggies. Very nice and powerful sounding with attention to the low level details. I will be going back sometime soon for a real audition. It is a nice looking piece as well.

[mattybumpkin]

And really enjoyed it, great tight bass, excellent detail, soundstaging, etc.  I thought the tonality was quite good and balanced too.  Though, some will say it is a little thin and/or analytical.  I did not hear this myself.

I used it to drive a pair of GMA Europa's, which it did quite easily.  I almost upgraded with SMC to one of the revisions (gold/platinum??) but decided to give tubes a try.

I don't think you could go wrong with a McCormack amp, especially when you have an upgrade path awaiting you which supposedly puts the amp into an "elite" category.

Regards,

[BobM]

I have a DNA .5 Deluxe which has been upgraded to near Rev-A (I say near because I've done the mods myself and couldn't do one or two of the circuit changes that Steve kept to himself for proprietary reasons). Very, very nice guy to deal with personally. really into the hobby and wants the best sound out of his products.

If you can find a .5 or a 1 that have already been modded to rev A then go for it. The 125 and 225 have incorporated much of the more basic mods already - I guess that equates to a Rev B of the older models, or somewhat close to it. The Rev A's bring both series very close to each other in sound - the edge going one way or the other only slightly. Platinum adds a few additional boutique mods that provide a more performance, but are pretty expensive for what they are (IMHO).

There is a slight board layout difference. the 125 and 225 have all parts mounted on a single board, while the .5 and 1 have 2 extra side boards. That may be why they looked a little more spartan to you. But the circuit is essentially the same, with some minor variations. Steve can elaborate on these far better than I can, if you drop him an e-mail.

Yes, the mods make an improvement that is truly hard to believe. You'll be laughing out loud at the differences you hear. Truly world class amps in either flavor with the Rev A or platinum mods.

Good luck,
Bob