OK, I finally did it. Courtesy of a fellow head-fi'er and Alex Cavalli, I finally had the opportunity to audition the BHSE and the LL at the same time, using a SR-009, all in the known environment of my home. What follows are some highly subjective and lacking any measurement data impressions.
Bias alert: none that I'm aware of. I paid for round-trip shipping on both the BHSE/009 and the LL; I don't own any of these fine devices at the moment, nor do I have plans to enter long positions on either anytime soon. I've owned the LL and 009 before, and am hence arguably more familiar with this combo's sound signature, but I wasn't rooting for either. In other words - I have no vested interest to see one outperform the other.
The setup was identical, Apple lossless files -> Resolution Audio Cantata Music Center DAC -> balanced Q Audio interconnects -> amplifier -> SR-009. Music choices ranged from jazz to classical to rock to electronica, and I used the same material to which I usually listen when evaluating new equipment.
Look and feel - in my opinion, the BHSE wins hands-down. While I appreciate the LL's minimalistic design, the BHSE is in a different league. From a practical standpoint, the LL was the winner - all-in-one unit, smaller, easier to place and blend in. In my particular setup, I could simply not accommodate a BHSE given its two-unit design, though the LL was somewhat of a challenge as well in my three-post rack, and I ended up placing it on the top shelf while I owned it. The BHSE runs hot, the LL cooler, though I wouldn't place anything on top of it. The BHSE has a very nice glow in the dark, the LL has a cold blue pair of LEDs. To each his or her own, but I prefer warmth over koolness
Based on my listening, the BHSE is a bit more resolving than the LL. However, resolution isn't everything. In another hobby of mine, photography, there's a similar pitfall when comparing lenses, always at the ready, to distract obsessive photographers from the greater picture, and it's called "pixel peeping". Said trait will concern a user so much with the sharpness at pixel level, thinking that it's an end-all to what constitutes ultimate image quality, that he or she will stop seeing the forest for the trees; there's so much more to the overall photo than the pixel sharpness that it's not even funny. There is saturation, micro-contrast, pop, fringe and color aberration control that ultimately all go towards giving a photo a life-like dynamic. Much in this sense, the BHSE outresolves the LL to a degree... does this mean it's more enjoyable in giving life to the recording? Not in the least. Wire with gain is an oft-repeated and in my opinion vastly overrated characteristic of an amplifier. An amp is but one component tasked with bringing the recording to life; the whole chain needs to be synergistic enough that the output has that lively sparkle, that captivating edge making the listener want to get lost in the music. Make no mistake, the LL is one very revealing and detailed amp; it's just not to the degree that it will flaunt such; it's the refined and understated elegance that gives its details a confidence rooted in a very dynamic presentation. To put this another way - the LL presents details in a way that they're there should you choose to register them; the BHSE gives them to you should you like it or not - and this aspect I found to be distracting.
Ultimately, they're both excellent amps, and once again I'm glad I had the opportunity to listen to them side-by-side. As far as I'm concerned, the LL/009 is simply unmatched by the BHSE/009, and neither can raise to the level of a good speaker system (though in fairness such a setup will cost a WHOLE lot more than a BHSE/LL/009 system).
