Musical Fidelity's A3 Integrated Amp and the A3 pre/power combo are breathtaking. I have no doubts that they are the best in the world (aside from other MF amps) compared to anything up to 3 times their cost. I STRONGLY recommend pairing them with B&W speakers.

You'll want to leave work early every day for a month just to hear how incredible music can be.

My previous system was a Conrad Johnson preamp (10a) with a B&K Sonata Power amp, B&W 640s, and a Klipsch powered dual 15" subwoofer. I bought them all off a guy for $1,500...the sub alone retailed for $900, so I was very lucky. Each other item was over $1,000 new.

This system just killed (I also used a Classe' preamp, but preferred the CJ), I had never heard anything like it. I had to sell the CJ, B&K, and Classe', but kept the B&Ws and Klipsch sub. Recently I replaced it with a Musical Fidelity A3 Integrated Amp. The CJ/B&K combo was amazing. The A3 blew my mind. (Actually jaw-dropping). And I'm using a fairly cheap Harman Kardan cd player (can't wait to get a nice dc player, and can't imagine music sounding any better than it does...but I've been assured it will).

I have bought, auditioned, and returned a ton of used equipment, which was all "audiophile" stuff (ie. Meridian, Classe', conrad johnson, etc.), and the Musical fidelity A3 has by far blown everything else away. I can't stress how important matching the right speakers to your amplifier is. I hated Martin Logans, Ushers, and Klipsch Floor Speakers (not hated, but they were WAY outclassed by the B&Ws). Everyone has their own taste. I've heard people say the B&W DM640s are bass heavy,,,and I use the with a 150Watt powered dual 15'' sub, which I greatly prefer!!

That being said, I cannot comment highly enough about the Musical Fidelity A3 Amp. One review I read hit it dead on: It is very clear, sweet sounding, great soundstaging, and EXTREMELY musical, but it has a unique (to me) intangible: It is lively! The music has energy which the Conrad Johnson/B&K (and everything I've heard) just can't approach. With B&Ws and a great Klipsch sub, I can't beieve what I got. Zeppelin music that i've listened to for 20 years (and thought that I was just "burned out" over) has literally sent chills down my spine as I "discovered" them on the A3. I cannot believe how much "more" they had to offer with just a different Amp (and the Conrad Johnson B&K combo was not a 'slouch' by any means...utterly blowing them away for $600, or for $2,600 for that matter, still has me shocked...I thought they were about as good as a setup as anything short of BIG money gear).

My friend went out and bought an A3 pre-amp/power amp combo after hearing mine (and B&W DM640s...the copycat!). I want to note that the MF power ratings seem absurdly conversative. His 120 watt amp seems at least twice as powerful (and infinitly better) than the Hafler 250 Watt power amp he replaced.

This is the only eview I have ever written. To anyone who wants a system that brings the :magic: out of music, listen to a Musical Fidelity amp. I haven't heard anything like it in my life. Just listen to one...you'll get it.

Similar Products Used:

Conrad Johnson, B&K, Classe', Meridian

Lively, vivid presentation and plenty of power.

With some speakers bass can be a little heavy handed

This is my second go round with the A300 as I owned one a few years ago. It was actually my first high end amp and after many different pieces of equipment including the Sim I5 and the Pathos Classic One V2 I bought this again. It works extremely well with my ProAc Tablette 50's. It is a lively performer and I like the phono stage. I replaced the Pathos with this because I wanted the phono stage having remembered how well it went with my Rega turntable. And after selling the Pathos and putting the MF A300 in the system, I discovered the difference between the 70wpc of the Pathos and the 150wpc of the A300. The Pathos would run out of steam at moderately higher listening levels than the MF A300. The A300 is a bit more forward but it sounds really good in my set up. The Pathos was a great amp for quiet late night listening but I don't miss it. At the prices you can get an A300 on Audiogon for nowadays you really can't miss. I hope to be able to purchase a pair of Dynaudio 1.3's soon . Right before I sold my first A300 i heard this combination and I thought it was magic.

Similar Products Used:

Sim I5, Pathos Classic One V2, Marantz SR7300ose

Lively,high current, vivid sound

This is my second go round with the A300. I am replacing a Pathos Classic One v2 that I sold. The Pathos was really good but it does run out of steam with only 70 watts. It's not even that I listen all that loud but the MF A300 is definately a livelier performer. At the price these are going for on Audiogon now, you can't go wrong . I like the phono stage. The amp performs well with my ProAc Tablette 50's. It can be a tad forward with them and I hope to pair it with some Dynaudio 1.3's shortly. I highly recommended this piece at it's original price of 1500 and now at it's current prices on Audiogon, you can't miss.

Similar Products Used:

Pathos Classic One v2, Sim I5, Marantz SR7300ose

Large Soundstage Lots of warmth and musicality No digital glare to speak of Big bass

Bass can be bloated at times Non-clinical, lack of detail Trouble with busy passages Horrible remote

I had very high expectations for the Musical Fidelity A300, which was at the time the most expensive used piece of equipment I had ever purchased. Initially, I was quite upset with the way my NHT ST-4's sounded when driven by the A300, but after about 4-5 months of listening, I have grown accustomed to the A300's idiosyncratic sound. The most apt description of this sound is, in the words of a previous reviewer, "warm at the expense of detail." The A300, at least for me, took a lot of getting used to, and I still can't say I'm not slightly disappointed. However, I have had a lot of moments where I have genuinely enjoyed the large expansive soundstage the A300 creates. If you like very big and warm non-clinical sound with a lot of bass (and I mean a LOT of bass), then the A300 may be for you. For value, I gave this 4 stars because of the relatively low price I paid for this. At MSRP, I would give this 3 stars. Overall, I gave the product 3 stars as I feel the particular "sound" of the A300 may not be appealing to a lot of listeners who like detail.

Similar Products Used:

The sources used were: Digital: Rotel RCD-930AX CD Player Analog: Technics SL-1200MKII Turntable w/ Shure V15VxMR Cartridge

Build quality. this thing weighs a ton! I picked it up and a Creek that I was considering and it made the Creek feel like a toy. Nice clean look, 5 YEAR WARRANTY! Sound, of course.

Cost. (while I understand that most audiophiles would and do consider this amp a good value, I thought that maybe the amp should cost around 1 to 1.1k)The 2 dealers I went to, one wanted the full RETAIL price ($1600) and the other charged me $1400. I have no real world experience into pricing of components, just a gut feeling. If you want to listen to headphones you will need to buy a headphone amp and plug into the rear of the unit. (I had to, and did because I wasn't going to let my expensive Sennheisers go unused, no way no how.)

This review is for the A3.2 integrated amp. I purchased this amp less than a month ago. (I was given the green light from my wife) Anyway like the other reviews I have left here, I will start off by saying that the dealer I bought from was a class act all the way. (I have been VERY fortunate that I am dealing with such patient and understanding people in this hobby so far. Kudos to the staff and owner of Audio Connection) I have sold my Marantz PM 7000 integrated to supplement the cost of this amp. While $1400 might not be a lot of money to a lot of people in this hobby, $1400 is a mortgage payment and then some for me. So I don't take spending money like this lightly. When I spend money like this, I want the product to just blow me away. (and luckily, this amp does that so far) The A3.2 is my second foray into hi end sound. If I thought that the Marantz amp I was using was musical, this amp just blows the Marantz away! I actually look forward to coming home, slipping into the old comfy slippers, making a light drink and just sitting on the couch to listen to my girls wail away. Ella Fitzgerald, Sade and Jewel. I would include Basia into the mix, but her CD's are'nt well recorded at all, even though she can sing. This amp has a cleaner sound without a doubt. My son, (who is 14) told me the other night how much cleaner and clear it sounds. Now that is coming from a kid who likes to listen to Rap crap. (no offense, I come from The Bronx, where rap was invented) Highs and lows are right on target. If I had to give a negative it would have to be in the mid range. While it is there, it just doesn't stand out as in the highs and lows. That doesn't necessarily mean a bad thing. I also have been told that the amp needs a good 150-200 hours of break in. If I had to guess, I have less than a true 20-30 hours so I am more than confident that the amp will come into it's own. Overall I am very happy with the amp. It looks great in my Salamander rack. I'm using a NAD 541i cd player and feel that I might be missing something by not upgrading that unit to the MF CD player. (I just can't justify spending another $1100-1200 for a CD player, this early and soon after the holidays)

Similar Products Used:

Marantz PM 7000, NAD.

Grace, grace, and more grace. This is one fine product.

No main-in for use with external amp or active crossover.

I purchased this amp in hopes of driving a set of exceptional, yet impedance challenged speakers and have not been disappointed. This amp has excellent power reserves and handles complex passages with great grace and ease. It handles male and female vocals nicely and doesn't show any signs of edginess or harshness that you might expect from a product in this price range. I may not have this amp forever, but having heard integrated amps from Krell, Levinson, McIntosh, and others, I can't imagine ever "upgrading" in performance to one of those pricey beasts. Maybe an upgrade in snob-appeal, but unless Musical Fidelity goes out of business, I'm sticking with them if I need additional products in the future. System: Musical Fidelity A3 CD Musical Fidelity A3.24 DAC Musical Fidelity A300 integrated amp Dunlavy SC-IV's (primary speakers) home-brew "DIY" silver interconnects "DIY" Cat-5 speaker cables

Similar Products Used:

Shanling CD100 Manley Stingray Avalon Eidolon (this is my secondary listening room setup -- the MF-A300 went straight to the primary listening room!)

Stunning build. Fantastic lower and higher end force, crunch, drive, and capability.

The real definition of a solid-state amp--lots of power, lots of force, but lacked the engaging warm/sweet midrange personality of other units.

Although I do not own this unit, it has been a goal of mine for quite some time (the A300 paired with the A3 CD player is a fantastic combo, and something I've been wanting to buy for quite some time). Recently, ready to buy an integrated amp, I did a substantial (solid 2 hours, with my own disc's) listening session of this amp v. the Arcam A75 Plus v. the NAD C370. The C370 I immediately didn't like, simply because it sounded like what it was--an inexpensive, power-hungry oaf. I felt that it lacked personality, which is something I like from my components, and therefore the music was not engaging for me. So I quickly moved onto the A300 and the A75 Plus. I'll start by saying that the store where I listened sold the A75 Plus for around $999, and the A300 for around $1,400--the difference I heard was worth $400. Yet I must admit that the Arcam could respectfully be compared to the A300 in many ways, and in some ways I prefer the A75 Plus. As far as build quality goes, there is really no comparison--the A300 is a beastly tank of a component, with a gorgeous metallic front panel that screams quality. All of its knobs just felt higher quality. It also weighed way more than the A75 Plus, which seemed like a plastic joke toy in build comparison. What A75 Plus lacks in sound is the sheer clean power that the Musical Fidelity unit provides--which gave the A300's signature sound of drive, force, and an overall forward musical presentation. The A300 could hammer the lower-end home with precision and effectiveness, and at the same time could give the highs that raw and detailed accuracy that clean and powerful units are known for. Yet I found that in the mid-range, in the way that both units presented vocals, that the A75 Plus was just a bit more engaging and musical. The A300 sounded like I was listening to a very high-quality solid state component, but the A75 Plus was more tube-like (which I tend to prefer), offering a warm and sweet personality that the A300 lacked. But then there's that low and high-end loss with the A75 Plus, a unit that provided solid, punchy, and accurate bass (though uneventful compared to the A300), and slightly rolled-off and less-detailed highs (although cymbals did sound full-bodied and did effectively shimmer and hover). In the end, when I nabbed the A75 Plus off EBay for $450, I never looked back. Although I would still prefer the A300, I feel that for each unit’s gain over the other, there is a loss as well. I was surprised in my listening sessions that two solid-state, comparably priced integrated competitors could sound so very different, and I loved every minute I spend with the two. My final comment is that although I prefer the A300, for the $1,000 I saved, I am thrilled and I don't think anyone would argue that the difference between these units is worth that much ($400 is one thing, but $1,000 is an obvious choice). The Arcam made CD's much more enjoyable for me, while the A300 almost didn't sound like a CD at all--it didn't have any digital edge to it whatsoever. Anyway, that is my comparison.

Similar Products Used:

Arcam, NAD, etc.

Can be easily sold in the used market.

Finishing can be better. Not compatible to JM Labs and Epos.

The big reviews in magazines led me to buy this. The amp is totally not compatible to JM Labs and Epos speakers. Sounded OK with B&W CDMs, but still dry and thin on vocals. Spent 4 months trying all cables & isolation system to get the bass and mids. I ended up selling the A300 in the used market. The JM Labs and EPOs are great sounding speakers, and driven easily by the valve 28 wpc Copland 401. Unfortunately, the A300 does not work on my system, on 150 wpc.

Similar Products Used:

Copland VTL Graaf

Best bang for the buck.

Mid is a little too dry. Warm at the expense of details. Lacks power during demanding passages (in terms of complexity or loudness or both).

Words of advice (1): Many dishonest retailers sell the B-stock as A-stock, beware! Words of advice (2): It appears that A300 has 2 models. The earlier model has the gold trim. The newer model has the platinum trim which indicates the upgraded parts and transformer. I have been told by fellow audiophiles that the earlier (gold trim) model sounds better. This review is for the gold trim model. Words of advice (3): I think the A300.2 is out? This little integrated amp gets you good bang for the buck. It surely is no match against many of the setups I have before (see similar products used). But for less than $1000 used, how much could you ask for? The 150w/ch into 8ohms, 250w/ch into 4 ohms rating is misleading. It has a tough time driving my Revel F30 (87db, 6ohm) when playing reasonable complex orchestral passages. Either it sounds like jumble-mumble, or all the punch/attacks are gone. And don't get me started about my experience of matching it with B&W 801 Matrix Series 2. The female vocal is better than I expected, but then again, you can't buy miracle with $1000. Soundstage, imaging precision and clarity are also not as good. If you have the luxury to do equipment matching, I think the Krell 300i is a WAY BETTER choice ($1200 used). Spending a few hundred bucks more and you could try the McIntosh MA6500. Finally, the EAR SET tube integrated is a good choice too. The remote as as cheap as you could possibly get.

Similar Products Used:

Mark Levinson 26/23, Antique Sound Lab 1006(845), Krell 300i, McIntosh MA6900, Classe CP60/CA200, Sonic Frontiers, Rotel (ouch!), Accuphase

*Big sound stage *Very powerful *Very nice detail *Deep and detailed bass *Articulate and smooth midrange *High frequencies sweet and detailed but never fatiguing *Great build quality.

*They don't make them anymore.

I originally had the Musical Fidelity A3 Integrated for about 2 months. Although the A3 was incredibly good it tended to sound a bit bright on poor recordings, and there are a lot of poor recordings out there. Also, the overall sound was slightly "brassy". Anyway, having come into some extra money, I took the A300 home to hear the difference. I was immediately struck by how much bigger the sound stage was. The sound was wider, deeper, and taller than the A3. Also the bass in the A300 was much better being both deeper and more detailed. The detail in the rest of the sound spectrum was about the same as the A3 or maybe a tiny bit better. Music on the A300 never sounds bright or fatiguing and there is no hint of the "brassiness" that I sometimes heard on the A3. It is also very powerful. You will have a hard time trying to find a pair of speakers the A300 cannot drive. The build quality is great. It’s quite heavy and has enormous gold plated binding posts that say Nu-Vista on them. Alas it’s not a Nu-vista amp but I hope it gets me some of the way there. A great amp for the money. I'm very happy. My system: Rotel RCD1070 CD player Musical Fidelity A300 integrated amp Mission 753 speakers Audioquest Crystal speaker cable Kimber Silverstreak interconnect cable

Similar Products Used:

Amps from Bryston, Linn, Naim, Cyrus, Cambridge Audio, and the Musical Fidelity A3.