Thanks for your responses, folks. I appreciate it that no one saw fit to seriously flame me for having a different take on the NFs - although I do think there's some defensiveness in the replies of some of the NF apologists. To be expected when people have their emotions and self-esteem caught up in their stated positions, as I believe could be the case in some instances. On the other hand, different ears hear different things and one man's audio utopia might well be another's yawn.
I won't go into vast detail on my componentry, cables etc, as I know I have a respectable system that is well capable of showing up the qualities of quality amps - good and not so good. eg: B&W CDM9NT speakers, quality Marantz CD player (can't recall model number, but it was around $800 and to my ears is excellent...many notches up on the run of the mill Sony it replaced). So, not up there with the best, but pretty good gear and well sufficient for the purposes of comparing amps. And yes, this is my system, I know it well, and the CDs I listened to covered a wide generic range, from hard rock to folky to classical to jazz and in between (rock is my love, though, and that's where I concentrated - 60s to current). I found the NFs were good on quieter stuff with not too much happening at once, but fell down when the sound became denser and as I mentioned before, were simply weak with hard rock, actually quite unpleasant and glarey at volume.
Re Werticus's comment: "I reallly dont know where your getting this "bright and cheap" from with regards to the highs - I just cannot hear it like that at all. And it would seem there are quiet a few people saying this of late, whenever someone has a fault to pick with these amps its always bright and cheap, makes me think something is wrong/ setup wrong/ mismatching your setup etc."
Firstly, I can tell you exactly where I'm getting this "bright and cheap" from - my own ears! I have not seen anyone else making such comments (but if you say they are, I can only take some assurance from that - it's nice to know you're not alone), and I do not take my cue from industry "experts", dealers etc. I can assure you there is nothing "wrong" with my system. I am wondering, to be frank, whether you have projected your own way of drawing conclusions about equipment in this comment of yours, which implies that my opinion is secondhand or borrowed. Not the case.
Now Werticus, exactly what do YOU mean by your claim that the NFs made the BCs sound "slow"? I note that one of your constant superlatives re the NFs is that they are incredibly "fast". It so happens that this same adjective is one that is bandied about on the earliest reviews of the NFs and that dealers inevitably use. Coincidence, or, as I postulated previously, are you falling into the trap of regurgitating learned response?
I know I am sounding harsh here, but I honestly believe that many audiophiles fall into this trap. It's called truth by agreement and is the enemy of objectivity (goes right back to the flat earth days...those scientists of yore were not stupid, but this truism prevented them from "seeing" the truth until someone was prepared to speak to his own observations that calculations did not add up and be branded a heretic...in time, others "saw" and a new truth was born - again by agreement, but this time supported by real evidence).
There is no point in my restating my opinion that from my week of listening experience the BCs were tangibly and obviously superior to the NFs in producing good, accurate, clear, "musical" sound, and better keeping their dignity under volume pressure, then adding this or that observation to strengthen my argument. Why? Because I'm not interested in winning an argument!
You're entitled to your opinion, Werticus, as is Rocket and others who are extolling the virtues they think they hear in the NFs. To my ears, the superiority of the BCs is obvious - and this is my considered opinion after a week of comparisons on my own system at home, listening to a swag of music of varying styles I know well - so where do you go from there?
I WANTED to love the NFs. I DON'T WANT to spend 3 times more on the BCs. However, above all, I want a quality system at an affordable price that does justice to the music I love, and at the moment, my experience is that the BC gets far closer to delivering what I want than the NFs. Better clarity in a wide range of music, less colouration, equally good bass (neither amp is brilliant), smoother, better imagery, and all in all, simply better able to reproduce an authentic musical experience. I just can't articulate it any better than that.
I am interested in Jason's (of NF) acknowledgement that they have areas they need to improve, and that they are committed to doing so. I look forward to future models, because if NF can get it right at a good price, I'll be queueing up. All I'm saying is that they haven't got it right yet, and this is not being reflected in all the hyperbole that's being thrown about. Always for me, listening is believing, and that's all I've based my comments on. I don't talk the talk cos I don't know the language of hifi and it doesn't interest me to learn it. This doesn't mean I don't have a good set of discriminating ears, though. Neither does it mean I'm a babe in the hifi woods. I've had an avid interest in sound equipment since the 70s, and have been through my share of chopping and changing. I do not have the funds to get the best, but I know others who do and have hitched many a listening ride on their better listening vehicles.
That's sounding like I'm now defending myself and trying to establish my own cred - ah well, we're all slaves of ego. The trick is to recognise it in its many deceptive guises! But that is another story...
