|
Post by RightinLA on Feb 13, 2014 23:53:38 GMT -5
Did you really think you were going to get away with that The C41 was one of worst $big preamps I have ever heard, flat, lifeless, some might say MP3 like. With a potentiometer volume control that went scratchy in a few days of use. The problem with the C42 is that it outputs balanced at +1.2 and -1.2 volts. That's half the industry standard, I needed another pre amp between the C41 and a power amp to get decent volume. Strange design that one. The C2300 I have no personal experience with, but I noticed that it was replaced with the C2500 is double quick time (for McIntosh anyway). Possibly to overcome the stupidity of not equipping the C2300 with a DAC. Yes, that's right a $6K pre amp with no DAC I agree "once you go Mac it is hard to go back" because you have wasted all your money. I agree, he landed on his head with those comments! The challenge is always there, for anyone, anytime, my comments on the C41 and C42 are based on my personal experiences. If what I have posted is doubted then please by all means check the facts. The issues I pointed out with the C41 and C42 are real, read McIntosh's spec's if you want to confirm them. Then read a few reviews, independent ones please, not those from magazines that depend on McIntosh for $big adverting. As for the C2300, some might argue (and have) that a $6K pre amp should not have a DAC and that the C2300 is a perfectly good pre amp, that's a perfectly reasonable opinion. But obviously McIntosh themselves don't agree with that opinion, because they replaced the C2300 with the C2500 in what for them was short order. More importantly the C2500 comes with an on board DAC. You can read that however you like, to me it's a strong indicator that they admit that they made a mistake leaving the DAC out of C2300. My opinions are exactly that, my opinions, not worth a lot, but I stand ready to defend them when challenged. Cheers Gary Your experiences differ from mine by 180 degrees. The C41 and C42 are very fine preamps. Your negative experience with those preamps is way outside the norm. Perhaps you mated the preamp with the wrong amp. I mate mine with a MC168 and MC202 and they are wonderful pairings. I'd gladly trade my XSP-1 preamps for a good condition C42 or C41 or even a C15 preamp any time. That doesn't mean I don't like the XSP-1. I do very much, but it isn't a McIntosh.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Feb 14, 2014 1:21:32 GMT -5
Your experiences differ from mine by 180 degrees. The C41 and C42 are very fine preamps. Your negative experience with those preamps is way outside the norm. Perhaps you mated the preamp with the wrong amp. I mate mine with a MC168 and MC202 and they are wonderful pairings. I'd gladly trade my XSP-1 preamps for a good condition C42 or C41 or even a C15 preamp any time. That doesn't mean I don't like the XSP-1. I do very much, but it isn't a McIntosh. I think it's a bit more than "my experiences". Let's start with the C42, the fact is it came with the balanced connectors at +1.2 and -1.2 volts (ie 2.5 volts). I think everyone knows that that around is half the industry standard of 4.3 volts and severely limits the output volume from the power amp. I don't think it matters whether the power amp is another McIntosh or not. Please refer to the McIntosh C42 Manual page 14 akdatabase.org/AKview/albums/userpics/10004/C42%20Owners.pdf The C42 was the first of McIntosh pre amps I encountered with the digital volume control and it was rather weirdly calibrated, lots of turning for not much change in the volume. Until half way then it went crazy loud real fast. Later versions addressed this issue following many customer complaints, I was one of them. The 8 band equalizer top frequency centre is 4K, whereas 10K is far more useful, but that's a personal opinion, although I have heard others complain similarly. Moving on to the C41, of course it has exactly the same issue with balanced output voltage, manual here, page 18 akdatabase.org/AKview/albums/userpics/10004/C41%20Owners.pdfIn relation to the volume control, the C41 potentiometer volume control was replaced by the C42 style referred to above. It displays all of the issues that lead to the almost universal move away from potentiometer volume controls. Australia can be a dusty and quite humid environment and perhaps this explains the pots short life prior to cleaning. I think I mentioned in another thread, there used to be a group I did some work with that insisted on McIntosh gear, something about them being good enough for The Grateful Dead then they were good enough for them. So I've had lots of exposure, frequently not of the good kind. Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by RightinLA on Feb 14, 2014 9:26:17 GMT -5
Based on your reasoning above, you could argue that Marilyn Monroe was ugly because she had a mole on her face. The issues you state above are nitpicky to the extreme and you exaggerate their importance while totally disregarding the preamps truly superb performance. In real use, both these preamps sound fantastic, play loud enough for any reasonable ear and survive exceedingly well when used indoors. If one wants to get into the superb sound of McIntosh equipment, I would highly recommend someone picking up either of those preamps. Based on their excellent history, I suggest that they will continue to work long after some more recent preamps have bit the dust. I would also recommend their integrated amps like the MA6500 or better yet, the MA6900. All of these are available on the used market for reasonable prices.
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Feb 14, 2014 12:46:39 GMT -5
Based on your reasoning above, you could argue that Marilyn Monroe was ugly because she had a mole on her face. The issues you state above are nitpicky to the extreme and you exaggerate their importance while totally disregarding the preamps truly superb performance. In real use, both these preamps sound fantastic, play loud enough for any reasonable ear and survive exceedingly well when used indoors. If one wants to get into the superb sound of McIntosh equipment, I would highly recommend someone picking up either of those preamps. Based on their excellent history, I suggest that they will continue to work long after some more recent preamps have bit the dust. I would also recommend their integrated amps like the MA6500 or better yet, the MA6900. All of these are available on the used market for reasonable prices. Why don't you just say you don't know what he's talking about in terms of the line level outs. Mcintosh is a BS brandname riding on the coat tails of days gone by decades ago. Explain to me why the XLR out is not +4 dBu huh!?! Perhaps it's to force you to have Mcintosh in your entire rack huh huh?
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Feb 14, 2014 12:56:55 GMT -5
Your experiences differ from mine by 180 degrees. The C41 and C42 are very fine preamps. Your negative experience with those preamps is way outside the norm. Perhaps you mated the preamp with the wrong amp. I mate mine with a MC168 and MC202 and they are wonderful pairings. I'd gladly trade my XSP-1 preamps for a good condition C42 or C41 or even a C15 preamp any time. That doesn't mean I don't like the XSP-1. I do very much, but it isn't a McIntosh. I think it's a bit more than "my experiences". Let's start with the C42, the fact is it came with the balanced connectors at +1.2 and -1.2 volts (ie 2.5 volts). I think everyone knows that that around is half the industry standard of 4.3 volts and severely limits the output volume from the power amp. I don't think it matters whether the power amp is another McIntosh or not. Please refer to the McIntosh C42 Manual page 14 akdatabase.org/AKview/albums/userpics/10004/C42%20Owners.pdf The C42 was the first of McIntosh pre amps I encountered with the digital volume control and it was rather weirdly calibrated, lots of turning for not much change in the volume. Until half way then it went crazy loud real fast. Later versions addressed this issue following many customer complaints, I was one of them. The 8 band equalizer top frequency centre is 4K, whereas 10K is far more useful, but that's a personal opinion, although I have heard others complain similarly. Moving on to the C41, of course it has exactly the same issue with balanced output voltage, manual here, page 18 akdatabase.org/AKview/albums/userpics/10004/C41%20Owners.pdfIn relation to the volume control, the C41 potentiometer volume control was replaced by the C42 style referred to above. It displays all of the issues that lead to the almost universal move away from potentiometer volume controls. Australia can be a dusty and quite humid environment and perhaps this explains the pots short life prior to cleaning. I think I mentioned in another thread, there used to be a group I did some work with that insisted on McIntosh gear, something about them being good enough for The Grateful Dead then they were good enough for them. So I've had lots of exposure, frequently not of the good kind. Cheers Gary You're wasting your time Gary trying to explain anything to a guy with a retort such as this .
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Feb 14, 2014 13:02:23 GMT -5
Huh....I think I am going to sell my tube preamp...But wait I like it!
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Feb 14, 2014 13:11:40 GMT -5
Solidstate: personal stuff like this "clueless" stuff is not encouraged here according to the forum rules. Feel free to disagree/debate about facts and opinions but let's keep it friendly?
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Feb 14, 2014 14:11:30 GMT -5
Aren't the Outlaw amps rebadged ATI units?
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Feb 14, 2014 14:36:40 GMT -5
Solidstate: personal stuff like this "clueless" stuff is not encouraged here according to the forum rules. Feel free to disagree/debate about facts and opinions but let's keep it friendly? Fixed. Clearly he doesn't understand what Gary is telling him and you have no problem with retorts such as, "Based on your reasoning above, you could argue that Marilyn Monroe was ugly because she had a mole on her face. The issues you state above are nitpicky to the extreme and you exaggerate their importance while totally disregarding the preamps truly superb performance." but me pointing out he's clueless as to what Gary is telling him is wrong? He is clueless as to what Gary is telling him. Disagree? Then please do offer a rational explanation as to how I'm wrong in suggesting it's clueless to compare Gary's critique of Mcintosh gear with Marilyn Monroe's mole.
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Feb 14, 2014 14:43:34 GMT -5
Aren't the Outlaw amps rebadged ATI units? Yes they are and not only that they have the DC section moved to the other end of the module so they use a newer revision tweaked AT2000 series module. Other than Emotiva I can't think of better bang/buck solid-state amps on the market. Morris Kessler is one of the great amplifier designers up there with John Curl, Nelson Pass and Bob Cordell. There are many others including people like Randall Smith that have also made big contributions to audio amplifiers. Many people actually over the course of 100+ years dating to people like Lee DeForest in the late 1800s. What has made Morris very successful is having the best NA production house for highend audio equipment with a top notch assembly team. If Jade/Emo wants to follow those footsteps in NA then your ASSEMBLY TEAM is EVERYTHING...
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Feb 14, 2014 14:55:08 GMT -5
Based on your reasoning above, you could argue that Marilyn Monroe was ugly because she had a mole on her face. The issues you state above are nitpicky to the extreme and you exaggerate their importance while totally disregarding the preamps truly superb performance. In real use, both these preamps sound fantastic, play loud enough for any reasonable ear and survive exceedingly well when used indoors. If one wants to get into the superb sound of McIntosh equipment, I would highly recommend someone picking up either of those preamps. Based on their excellent history, I suggest that they will continue to work long after some more recent preamps have bit the dust. I would also recommend their integrated amps like the MA6500 or better yet, the MA6900. All of these are available on the used market for reasonable prices. I believe the inability of a pre amp to supply sufficient output voltage to enable a power amp to achieve its full potential is a bit more than a mole on MM. This is a ~50% deviation from the industry standard and caused much angst for the owner trying multiple power amps and speakers believing that the McIntosh pre amp could never be an issue. It wasn't until he asked me to have a look and I read the owners manual, then called McIntosh support, that we discovered the real reason for the volume deficiency. Of course the local,McIntosh retailer, who went out of business some years ago, suggested a complete McIntosh solution for $thousands. The volume deficiency was very obvious, the gear was in a large room which opened out onto a huge balcony overlooking the harbour. I did a temporary replacement with a Marantz pre amp that sounded just as good according to the 20 people in attendance and provided full volume from the power amps. Sure the volume from the C41 was more than sufficient for one person listening at personal preference levels. But failed the party test dismally. Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Feb 14, 2014 15:12:03 GMT -5
Based on your reasoning above, you could argue that Marilyn Monroe was ugly because she had a mole on her face. The issues you state above are nitpicky to the extreme and you exaggerate their importance while totally disregarding the preamps truly superb performance. In real use, both these preamps sound fantastic, play loud enough for any reasonable ear and survive exceedingly well when used indoors. If one wants to get into the superb sound of McIntosh equipment, I would highly recommend someone picking up either of those preamps. Based on their excellent history, I suggest that they will continue to work long after some more recent preamps have bit the dust. I would also recommend their integrated amps like the MA6500 or better yet, the MA6900. All of these are available on the used market for reasonable prices. I believe the inability of a pre amp to supply sufficient output voltage to enable a power amp to achieve its full potential is a bit more than a mole on MM. This is a ~50% deviation from the industry standard and caused much angst for the owner trying multiple power amps and speakers believing that the McIntosh pre amp could never be an issue. It wasn't until he asked me to have a look and I read the owners manual, then called McIntosh support, that we discovered the real reason for the volume deficiency. Of course the local,McIntosh retailer, who went out of business some years ago, suggested a complete McIntosh solution for $thousands. The volume deficiency was very obvious, the gear was in a large room which opened out onto a huge balcony overlooking the harbour. I did a temporary replacement with a Marantz pre amp that sounded just as good according to the 20 people in attendance and provided full volume from the power amps. Sure the volume from the C41 was more than sufficient for one person listening at personal preference levels. But failed the party test dismally. Cheers Gary Gary, You know very well it failed in sound, IE competent, EE design! JUST SAY IT AN BE HONEST! So what was this persons response when they realized the issue was their friggin crap preamp? LOL PS also explain specifically why Mcintosh did this to the design... BE EXPLICIT IN LUDDITE TERMS! PSS I hope the Marantz unit was an under a grand AVR... ROTFLMAO
|
|
lmr
Minor Hero
Posts: 77
|
Post by lmr on Feb 14, 2014 15:51:14 GMT -5
Just hooked up a C2300 and it is night and day difference. Time to read the manual.
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Feb 14, 2014 16:06:41 GMT -5
I think this is going to be a very long discussion which I think is going to keep me entertained for the coming long weekend.....
|
|
|
Post by deltadube on Feb 14, 2014 16:28:16 GMT -5
Your experiences differ from mine by 180 degrees. The C41 and C42 are very fine preamps. Your negative experience with those preamps is way outside the norm. Perhaps you mated the preamp with the wrong amp. I mate mine with a MC168 and MC202 and they are wonderful pairings. I'd gladly trade my XSP-1 preamps for a good condition C42 or C41 or even a C15 preamp any time. That doesn't mean I don't like the XSP-1. I do very much, but it isn't a McIntosh. I think it's a bit more than "my experiences". Let's start with the C42, the fact is it came with the balanced connectors at +1.2 and -1.2 volts (ie 2.5 volts). I think everyone knows that that around is half the industry standard of 4.3 volts and severely limits the output volume from the power amp. I don't think it matters whether the power amp is another McIntosh or not. Please refer to the McIntosh C42 Manual page 14 akdatabase.org/AKview/albums/userpics/10004/C42%20Owners.pdf The C42 was the first of McIntosh pre amps I encountered with the digital volume control and it was rather weirdly calibrated, lots of turning for not much change in the volume. Until half way then it went crazy loud real fast. Later versions addressed this issue following many customer complaints, I was one of them. The 8 band equalizer top frequency centre is 4K, whereas 10K is far more useful, but that's a personal opinion, although I have heard others complain similarly. Moving on to the C41, of course it has exactly the same issue with balanced output voltage, manual here, page 18 akdatabase.org/AKview/albums/userpics/10004/C41%20Owners.pdfIn relation to the volume control, the C41 potentiometer volume control was replaced by the C42 style referred to above. It displays all of the issues that lead to the almost universal move away from potentiometer volume controls. Australia can be a dusty and quite humid environment and perhaps this explains the pots short life prior to cleaning. I think I mentioned in another thread, there used to be a group I did some work with that insisted on McIntosh gear, something about them being good enough for The Grateful Dead then they were good enough for them. So I've had lots of exposure, frequently not of the good kind. Cheers Gary wow Gary I had no idea... so are you saying an xsp 1 is better!!!!! I love mine.. cheers
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Feb 14, 2014 16:56:57 GMT -5
Solidstate: personal stuff like this "clueless" stuff is not encouraged here according to the forum rules. Feel free to disagree/debate about facts and opinions but let's keep it friendly? Fixed. Hey solidstate. I don't know if you remember me but I am a fan of your posts. I like the eccentricism and passion you have in them and I think you bring value to the lounge. Yes. Yes. You don't know that he's clueless. And even if he is wrong, it doesn't give a person license (on this forum) to call people clueless, dumb, moronic, etc. The rule of this forum is to be nice to people. "3. Be nice to each other and respect the moderators. Profanity, insults, knocking other brands, and generally rude behavior will not be tolerated. Period. Opinions are welcome, not bad behavior. 11. Discussion and opinions are welcome, but we must insist on civility. It’s really simple: Treat others as you would wish them to treat you. " I don't have to Rightinla can defend himself if he wishes to. But since you asked. He is talking about how the thing sounds. And gary is talking about the specs and the failures he encountered with the volume issue and pointing to the half voltage output as a reason why the thing sounds bad. Rightinla is saying that gary is focusing on very specific detail while ignoring that the pre-amp sounds really good and better than for instance an XSP-1 (according to him). So the analogy holds true. When you simply look at the mole on monroes face in great detail zoomed up, one could say ugh, anybody that has such an ugly spot right on their face must be ugly. But when looking at the whole person, they are beautiful.
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Feb 14, 2014 17:46:42 GMT -5
Just hooked up a C2300 and it is night and day difference. Time to read the manual. That's a newer unit with different outputs than the C41 and C42.
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Feb 14, 2014 17:50:12 GMT -5
Just hooked up a C2300 and it is night and day difference. Time to read the manual. Nothing to do with the actual preamp but the phono stage in the Emotiva unit and it not "loading" your cart properly. Those lists of phono preamps I gave you would fix your issue for a tenth the cost. www.transcendentsound.com/Transcendent/Transcendent_Sound_Phono_Preamp.htmlThat's a grand assembled. I'm sure the C2300 sounds better than the Emotiva unit but it costs $6000 dollars or six times the price. It should sound better! BUT For your $6000 dollars you could get a TAP-X and one of those phono preamps I mentioned and have a couple grand back in your pocket if not more and dare I say better SQ!
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Feb 14, 2014 18:06:55 GMT -5
|
|
harri009
Emo VIPs
ReferenceAnalog.com
Posts: 1,425
|
Post by harri009 on Feb 14, 2014 18:08:29 GMT -5
Just hooked up a C2300 and it is night and day difference. Time to read the manual. That's great bud, I hope it's all you hoped it would be. Have fun listening!!
|
|