Any McIntosh Fans here ? ......

[joeinid]

I've had some McIntosh gear in the past (C2300, MC402, MC601's) and really liked it. I especially liked my MC601's with my Conrad Johnson ET-5 preamp at the time. That was a very enjoyable combo and thinking back, kind of miss them. So, do we have any McIntosh lovers here?

 

[Mike]

I've had some McIntosh gear in the past (C2300, MC402, MC601's) and really liked it. I especially liked my MC601's with my Conrad Johnson ET-5 preamp at the time. That was a very enjoyable combo and thinking back, kind of miss them. So, do we have any McIntosh lovers here?

Hi Joe,

We do. I have the MA6600 integrated amp. I like it a lot. It seems to work well with the Sophia IIs.

Mike

 

[joeinid]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for the reply. Glad you are happy with the MA6600.

 

[LL21]

I have not spent a lot of time with McIntosh...i remember hearing one piece with Morels many, many years ago...incredible smooth and easy to listen to...the Morels were excessively bright, detailed and the combo was great.

I also have a friend with Wilson X1s and he drives an all-Mcintosh system from their digital server source thru a series of very large monos.

 

[joeinid]

I have not spent a lot of time with McIntosh...i remember hearing one piece with Morels many, many years ago...incredible smooth and easy to listen to...the Morels were excessively bright, detailed and the combo was great.

I also have a friend with Wilson X1s and he drives an all-Mcintosh system from their digital server source thru a series of very large monos.

I'd be curious to hear the MC1.2KW's on my CR-1's.

 

[flez007]

I have always liked Mac gear, more because of the name and history than its sound, I am not saying it is bad, but not keen to my tastes overall. I had an MC756 with an C26 some moons ago.

 

[KeithR]

I've loved the MA6600 I owned, as well as the MC601s like you Joe.

the 601s are reference caliber amps that I will be gladly put up against amps 2-3x their costs. they dont' sound like 501s at all.

 

[joeinid]

I've loved the MA6600 I owned, as well as the MC601s like you Joe.

the 601s are reference caliber amps that I will be gladly put up against amps 2-3x their costs. they dont' sound like 501s at all.

I wonder if the MC1.2KW's will be updated to be more like the MC601's.

 

[mep]

I've loved the MA6600 I owned, as well as the MC601s like you Joe.

the 601s are reference caliber amps that I will be gladly put up against amps 2-3x their costs. they dont' sound like 501s at all.

So besides a 100 watts, what is the difference in their designs?

 

[KeithR]

They now use a ThermalTrak transistor which is largely assumed to make the difference- more linear, extended, and bigger. The 501s had a dark, somewhat sluggish sound while the new amps sound nothing like that. The amp is significantly larger than the prior version (larger heat sinks) and also uses better parts- never seen better binding posts, for instance.

People like to make fun of Mac, but 13k/pair for this kind of performance/build quality is pretty much unheard of in today's industry.

 

[joeinid]

edit ...

People like to make fun of Mac, but 13k/pair for this kind of performance/build quality is pretty much unheard of in today's industry.

+1

Well said!

 

[LL21]

+1

Well said!

Hi Joe...did not realize til now you'd had the Mc601...how would you compare it to your current Dartzeel, Burmester amps?

 

[joeinid]

Hi Joe...did not realize til now you'd had the Mc601...how would you compare it to your current Dartzeel, Burmester amps?

Hi Lloyd,

I did not appreciate them as much as I should have or do now, plus I have dedicated outlets now, which makes everything sound better. I was using the MC601's with a CJ ET-5 preamp. It was a very musical combo that I remember fondly and do miss. I would have loved to hear the MC601's now with the GAT preamp on my CR-1's. I believe it would be pretty nice but probably not the most transparent system (I don't like excess treble energy so I enjoyed the ET-5/MC601's). I was using Nola Micros at the time and had a stereo 911mk3 after the 601's. The 911 was better on the Nola Micros because it probably needed the higher detail of the 911. I am starting to realize as I get gear crazy, I start to lose focus on the music. The Burmester sound is bigger and ballsier and seems to be more meaty. The Dartzeel seems a little more natural, not as big but easier and less explosive. I hope that made a little sense.

 

[AudioExplorations]

I too had a McIntosh C2300 and MC402 which I loved at the time (the blue meters!!!!!! ). I then realised running my DAC power amp direct gave me a more pure and transparent sound, so I sold the c2300/mc402 combo and replaced them with a Burmester 911mk3 at no extra cost. The sonic improvement was SO huge that my opinion of McIntosh dropped, don't know if my (5yr old) MC402 was in need of service, or if the 911 is just exceptionally good but they perform on different levels.

 

[joeinid]

Joost,

"the 911 is just exceptionally good but they perform on different levels."

I think that's the answer.

 

[AudioExplorations]

I think so too Joe.

 

[dyfgys]

Hello,

interesting to read the different experiences music lovers made.
For me my new Mac combo ended a race for "the best" after more than 30 years. During that time I went from SS to Tubes, vice versa, from faster sounding to more relaxed and so on. Almost always I was sure that the setup of the moment was exactly what I wanted. But as times went by new players showed up and changed the picture.
During most of the time I had a few pieces of equipment in my second system or in reserve which were never the absolute best but always let me enjoy music when I was on the search again. In the older times it was a Quad 44/ 606 setup and later a McIntosh 6800 Integrated amp. The Mac is still here and is used in my wifes system. This amp worked with every speaker, be it Martin-Logans, Eminents LFT, Spendor´s or WATT/Puppies. It always showed the differences sources, cables or accessories really made when "the better" amps sometimes had their problems. The Mac was never the negative part of a problem when I wasn´t able to really enjoy my system during new testing and searching. And that happened to often.
Well, and that experience finally helped me to find my final setup. I stayed with the company which never let me down and bought a C2300/ MC402 setup. And that just a few weeks ago when everybody was runnin´for the newer models. I know I had ... faster or more dynamic sounding amps with bigger soundstages. I guess there is always some amp which does something better. But, for the first time I don´t get nervous. The way the music is presented is so complete, coherent, so pleasing be it operas or jazz, that I almost can´t quit listening to my so often played favorites. The Mac combo is everything the Integrated was, just in every aspect so much more.

It doesn´t mean I lost interest in better sound now. No, I am playing with new cables already and i am testing new sources. But the Macs don´t leave questions open in amplification so at least this part is finalized.

The thread starter asked for Macs user´s. Well, here is one, a very satisfied user who will not part again. Thanks for reading!

Best regards ... Sigi

 

[es347]

They now use a ThermalTrak transistor which is largely assumed to make the difference- more linear, extended, and bigger. The 501s had a dark, somewhat sluggish sound while the new amps sound nothing like that. The amp is significantly larger than the prior version (larger heat sinks) and also uses better parts- never seen better binding posts, for instance.

People like to make fun of Mac, but 13k/pair for this kind of performance/build quality is pretty much unheard of in today's industry.

The 501s had a dark, somewhat sluggish sound ....pure nonsense. I've had both in my listening room and first of all the two sound more alike than different and no one who I know who has heard or owned the 501s has never described them as dark and sluggish. Again, pure nonsense.

 

[GaryProtein]

I have to say, I love my Mc.

 

[KeithR]

The 501s had a dark, somewhat sluggish sound ....pure nonsense. I've had both in my listening room and first of all the two sound more alike than different and no one who I know who has heard or owned the 501s has never described them as dark and sluggish. Again, pure nonsense.

Then keep the 501s and save your money.

KeithR