What an interesting and useful comparative review!
He states the conundrum I have personally about OTL amplifiers: incredible crystalline midrange transparency, but is it the sound we actually want to listen to (versus warmer, but slightly fuzzier, output transformer tube amplifiers)?
Although still a sort of accurate, I guess it comes down how this translates into todays amp offering. What is seems is that ARC is shifting a bit away from there ARC bloom, large soundstage, mid range forward’isch sound with their new Ref 160 models while CAT is staying with their concept with the CL7 described it as a smaller package of their reference amps but with a more convenient tube biasing. Wondering if this will bring the two closer to each other. That also might bring the 2 amps closer.
My current ARC Ref 150 SE got more “reserve” since I have brought the AudioQuest Niagara 5000 in the set-up.
I think in that article Marc generalizes about solid state amps. I certainly preferred the Gamut to the ARC ref 110 on my Martin Logans, and I am usually a valve guy. I owned the ARC, and had compared ARC to Mark Levinson and the Krell Evo directly on the Logans, and had also heard devialet and MSB 200 on the same Logan speaker. At that time, I was not aware of other quality SS amps that I am now, but the Gamut was certainly better than the ARC even on vocals, which is an ARC strength.