someone earlier mentioned they wanted to try the 36.5 becuase they had the ls100
interesting to read a review that partially compares the 2
That said, the twin boxer did sound more solid-statish particularly in its handling of the upper ranges. While informativeness increased so did the potential for occasional album-enforced glassiness. The 6H30-fitted machine with its far smaller potential for valve rolling was the more articulate and crisp but texturally also drier. It wasn't really leaner on tonal balance—its bass exceeded the LS100 on mass and reach—but expressed differently weighted aspects on the transient/sustain/decay axis.
There was more emphasis on attacks, less envelope on bloom, more visibility on decays. The 'reduction in the middle' sounded leaner, the more sharply drawn attacks more transistory and the more illuminated and aerated presentation was dimensionally more resolved. Cooler and more defined but texturally less elegant and suave, in the end I favored the LS100 with its matching amp.
Audiophile check list in hand there was no question that the DM36.5 is more resolved and dynamically superior. Even so certain applications—the KWA100SE being one of them for me—could prefer the LS100. Switching DACs from Burson to Weiss diminished the inherent mild warmth and upshifted the presentation towards just a tad more DM36.5-type light whilst giving up midband density. Bottom line, against the Swiss neutrality of the AVC the DM36.5 was more honest but the LS100 more beautiful.
having had 2 36.5 i hope to try the ls100 sometime