I will point out what personal experience with regards to the Sharp 1 bit receiver units. I have one of the formerly raved about Sharp 1 bit receivers (can't remember model number but the one with seperate amp and has a MD player in it). I bought it for bedroom use and for that it is fantastic. I purchase for use with this stereo the $90/pair Omage AV21 which at their 89db efficiency and 6 ohm impedance seemed about right for the unit. I also have a pair of Tang Band 3" 871 based speakers that I built myself (which are only so-so performers, imo, as I have built them).
A while back, before trading my McCormack headphone amp for my current headphone amp I decided to do a mini shootout between the Sharp 1bit and the McCormack. The McAmp in question is the micro integrated amp that has speaker bindings and puts out about 10w/ch with the upgrade power supply. I figured this was a pretty fair comparison since the Sharp puts out only 12-13w/ch @ 8 ohms and 25 @ 4R, so by linear deduction would put out something in the range of 18w/ch. I used the Sharp for the preamp purposes for all comparisons, so the sharp's own amp has a clear advantage in this case as it is using no A/D or D/A stages, where w/ the McAmp there is probably a cheap D/A stage.
I made comparisons with both pairs of speakers. The tang band based speakers (I will refer to them as my Micros) sound fairly awful on the sharp until you really crank the volume and then they open up and sound a lot less harsh. My wife who was coming in and out of the room at the time also noted the same. There is no lower midbass at all at lower volumes and the upper midrange is brutally harsh. On the McAmp, the same holds true a bit with these speakers but not nearly as much, there is clearly a lot more lower midbass and weight to the music at normal bedroom listening levels.
Since I don't put much faith in these speakers (likely my poor craftsmanship at play here) I really focused on the comparison between the two amps with the Omage speakers. Again, at lower volumes I think the clear winner for being the most balanced overall sound goes to the McAmp. The speakers themselves are a bit too boomy imo but do have a fairly satisfying sound from the mids on up. The sharp has a very crisp, clear and detailed sound. It definitely sounds alive and open. However, the McAmp just had more weight and texture and more authoratively controlled the speakers, sounding a bit less boomy and more balanced overall. However, the McAmp suffered from a bit less detail and openness compared to the sharp amp but I question the cheap DA stage at play here. All that said, I am still quite happy with the Sharp as a bedroom receiver and I think I might play around with tweaking the Omage to address a couple of nitpicks.
I mention this not because I think someone is going to build their system around one of these units, but because I think it highlights a larger issue. I think a lot of us here are too quick to jump on the newest bandwagon or the next best thing. I have been to audio group meetings where I kind of felt like this sort of phenomena was happening, albeit on a smaller scale. Its easy it seems for an audiophile to be captured by a product that offers a lot of audiophile qualities (imaging, soundstage, openness, detail) at the expense of body, texture, authority and tonal balance. I think one needs to be cautiously optimistic when hearings something new and spend some serious time evaluating said product with the other factors in mind before drawing conclusions. I am not trying to be hyper critical of conversations here, I am part of all that, but just offering a reminder.
