Integrated Amp / Stereo Receiver

[Indydan]

On 10/18/2017 at 7:47 PM, beerandmusic said:

I have had several cambridge and don't hold a light to depth and separation and music you will get from a mcintosh....i can't speak for the rega.

Not a fair comparison. The least expensive McIntosh is 3 times or more the price of the most expensive Cambridge Audio. It should sound much better!

[opus101]

9 hours ago, gmgraves said:

 

That may well be the case. I know, for instance, that for years, McIntosh used interstage transformers to couple the signal to the output transistors in their SS designs. I always thought that the transformer made the amps sound warm but slow. I always thought that one of the great things about SS over tubes was the ability to get rid of transformers in the audio path, but beautifully designed and executed bi-filar wound output transformers were what made McIntosh stand-out from the crowd during the tube era, and I suspect they thought by incorporating transformer in their SS designs would keep the magic going. If they still do that, it might account for an amp that sounds different to you than do other amps.

 

As far as I'm aware, McIntosh are the only SS vendor using output (auto)transformers. Based on my own experience in using OPTs with chip-amps, they do make a difference where it matters to the amp's sound - giving better dynamics and more spaciousness. I persuaded another DIYer to try output trafos with his chipamp - he concurs : http://www.tirnahifi.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3810&start=160#p81841

[Speed Racer]

12 minutes ago, Indydan said:

Not a fair comparison. The least expensive McIntosh is 3 times or more the price of the most expensive Cambridge Audio. It should sound much better!

 

That's assuming you like the McIntosh solid state "house sound"....which I do not. A lot of people don't! A lot do....

[beerandmusic]

49 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

I am laughing because you can't make up your mind. I suspect a great DAC could come up and kiss you and you wouldn't know it.

 

I don't think you know what the difference is between NOS, hardware upsampling, software upsampling, and converting from PCM to DSD. I can guarantee that the majority don't prefer using HQplayer converting to DSD. Most users are not that sophisticated.

 

Software upsampling is often better than letting the DAC do it (what you call hardware upsampling). But that is not always the case. With a quality DAC that upsamples, you will not get "mushy" sound quality. 

 

There are a lot of people that prefer NOS DACs with no upsampling. There are those that prefer a NOS DAC with software upsampling. There are those that prefer Sigma Delta DACs and there are those that prefer R2R DACs.

 

What you should do is get a quality NOS DAC that supports DSD natively. But, I suspect you will end up with some under $500 DAC that sounds great to you......but doesn't really sound all that great.

LOL

 

I have had my share of Dacs from 100 to 2000.  I had most recently the NT501, and it supported native DSD.

Most people that use HQPLAYER do upsampling....most hqplayer users wouldn't put up with the interface unless they are serious, and use it's features.  The main feature that users like about HQPLAYER is it's upsampling....

I am sure i have been testing DSD dacs before you...but you can live in your fantasy land.  Don't know why you are picking something with me, but if you want to be critical of one another we can certainly start.

 

[beerandmusic]

16 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

That's assuming you like the McIntosh solid state "house sound"....which I do not. A lot of people don't! A lot do....

oh yea, you are the one that likes pioneer...

[Speed Racer]

5 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

oh yea, you are the one that likes pioneer...

 

I have listened to several solid state McIntosh amps and integrated amps. Have you listened to the Pioneer M-22?

 

<Mic drop>

[Speed Racer]

38 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

Most people that use HQPLAYER do upsampling....most hqplayer users wouldn't put up with the interface unless they are serious, and use it's features.  The main feature that users like about HQPLAYER is it's upsampling....

 

No, you missed my point. Most people aren't using HQplayer....

[uyire]

On 10/23/2017 at 11:28 AM, Ajax said:

why not use the 301 as a preamp and simply add a digital power amp such as those from Nord in the UK, of if you prefer A/B sound then look for an older power amp from Parasound, MacIntosh, Classe or Krell from sites such as Canuck Audio Mart or Ebay

 

I am considering the following items, do these look reasonably priced? And, are these generally genuine items and reliable?

 

MC-152 for $3099 + shipping + paypal fee

https://www.audiogon.com/listings/solid-state-almost-new-2017-10-18-amplifiers-f9ecdf1a-045b-433f-b7ab-25685bba35d6

 

MC 7200 + shipping $2200

http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649386618-mcintosh-mc-7200/

 

Another MC-152 for $3300

http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649382694-mcintosh-mc152-stereo-amplifier/

 

MC 7270 for $2500

http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649381122-mcintosh-mc_7270-power-amplifier/

 

MA6200 for $1500

local

 

[beerandmusic]

3 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

 

That's assuming you like the McIntosh solid state "house sound"....which I do not. A lot of people don't! A lot do....

Lets just say I am sure there are a LOT more people who would want a Mcintosh amp than would want a pioneer, but continue on in your fantasy land.

[beerandmusic]

50 minutes ago, uyire said:

 

I am considering the following items, do these look reasonably priced? And, are these generally genuine items and reliable?

 

MC-152 for $3099 + shipping + paypal fee

https://www.audiogon.com/listings/solid-state-almost-new-2017-10-18-amplifiers-f9ecdf1a-045b-433f-b7ab-25685bba35d6

 

MC 7200 + shipping $2200

http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649386618-mcintosh-mc-7200/

 

Another MC-152 for $3300

http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649382694-mcintosh-mc152-stereo-amplifier/

 

MC 7270 for $2500

http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649381122-mcintosh-mc_7270-power-amplifier/

 

MA6200 for $1500

local

 

spring for the MC-152....if you don't like it, you will be able to sell it...i even promise to buy it from you for $2500 if you ever decide to sell it...even 2 years from now....I really don't think you will ever be disappointed.  My guess is that over 90% of people who buy a Mcintosh will only buy a mcintosh...which is why they retain their value so well.  The MC152 is also still a current model and won many awards including HIFI world.

 

[beerandmusic]

2 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

 

No, you missed my point. Most people aren't using HQplayer....

You missed my point....only those that are serious about the best quality and upsampling.

 

[beerandmusic]

3 hours ago, opus101 said:

 

As far as I'm aware, McIntosh are the only SS vendor using output (auto)transformers. Based on my own experience in using OPTs with chip-amps, they do make a difference where it matters to the amp's sound - giving better dynamics and more spaciousness. I persuaded another DIYer to try output trafos with his chipamp - he concurs : http://www.tirnahifi.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3810&start=160#p81841

 

So build me one (grin)!

[beerandmusic]

3 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

 

Software upsampling is often better than letting the DAC do it (what you call hardware upsampling). But that is not always the case. With a quality DAC that upsamples, you will not get "mushy" sound quality. 

 

I didn't say it would be mushy...i said "mushy in comparison".

And that is my honest opinion.  I think when you let the DAC do the upsampling it taxes the dac,

If you have a file that is native 192K and play it and it doesn't need to be upsampled by the DAC, it seems to have more "spaciousness" than if you have the same file in 48K and have the dac upsample it.  It is my contention that if you play a file in native resolution that it sounds better.  I am not the only one that shares these feelings.  Maybe its the use of a different driver, maybe it's the dac having to do the processing...i don't know what it is, but that is my honest opinion. 

 

[PhilR]

On 10/17/2017 at 8:18 AM, uyire said:

I recently purchased a TEAC UD-301 DAC and I really like it (using it with TIDAL HiFi). I am in the process of upgrading my speakers (considering KEF LS50, BMR Philharmonitor and few other options). I am also looking at purchasing an integrated amp with/without DAC. 

 

Could someone help me with the selection process. My current list:

 

1) Cambridge Audio Azur 851A - $1699

2) Rotel RA-1572 ($1699) or RA-1570 (Used one)

3) Outlaw RR2160 Stereo Receiver - $799

 

I am open to other suggestions as well.

 

Thanks

 

Late to the game, but another solid contender could be a used Lyngdorf TDAI 2200. 200wpc into 8ohms, 375wpc into 4 ohms with great build quality. Built-in DAC if you don't mind using a USB-SPDIF convertor. The room correction can be an absolute game changer.

 

You can usually find fully loaded units on the market for $2000 - $2500. Retail was over $7K.

 

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/lyngdorf-audio-tdai-2200-roomperfect-digital-amplifier-and-room-correction-system/

 

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/viewpoint/0807/nearfield17.htm

[davide256]

11 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

 

I have listened to several solid state McIntosh amps and integrated amps. Have you listened to the Pioneer M-22?

 

<Mic drop>

It appears some like it.

 

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/pioneer-m-22-power-amp-epic-japanese-gear-from-the-past.4177/

 

However unless you have refurbished it, a 45 year old amplifier will have major issues with capacitor aging, and power cord wiring corrosion.

[Speed Racer]

9 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

I think when you let the DAC do the upsampling it taxes the dac.....

 

Seriously? You don’t understand how DACs work if you think that. 

[Speed Racer]

1 hour ago, davide256 said:

It appears some like it.

 

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/pioneer-m-22-power-amp-epic-japanese-gear-from-the-past.4177/

 

However unless you have refurbished it, a 45 year old amplifier will have major issues with capacitor aging, and power cord wiring corrosion.

 

Mine has been completely refurbished with new caps and cleaned contacts. There was no wire corrosion. 

 

More than some like it. The M-22 is an example of what could be done when no limits were placed on the audio engineers. Everyone that has heard mine has asked me to call them if I ever want to sell it. Yes, you do need 90dB+ efficient speakers. But those 30 watts of Class A power are glorious.

[GUTB]

12 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

Seriously? You don’t understand how DACs work if you think that. 

 

DACs work exactly like that.

[Speed Racer]

1 minute ago, GUTB said:

 

DACs work exactly like that.

 

No, they don’t. They are built with all the horsepower they need to upsample in real-time. Upsampling does not tax the DAC because that is exactly what it is built to do. It’s not at all like a computer where you have some processes slowing down others because they use too much CPU. The phrase “real-time” is key. Look it up.....

[GUTB]

Just now, Speed Racer said:

 

No, they don’t. They are built with all the horsepower they need to upsample in real-time. Upsampling does not tax the DAC because that is exactly what it is built to do. It’s not at all like a computer where you have some processes slowing down others because they use too much CPU. The phrase “real-time” is key. Look it up.....

 

In the real world, the SRC generates noise and bypassing it leads to better results.

[Speed Racer]

2 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

In the real world, the SRC generates noise and bypassing it leads to better results.

 

You are assuming facts not in evidence. You don’t know that not upsampling does anything in regards to circuit noise generation. You are making a huge assumption that may or may not be true. In fact it would be surprising if a DAC shut off a circuit just because it was not being used at the moment. In fact, it is more likely that the chips used to upsample provide other functions and are still used even when no upsampling is done. 

 

Now, you could argue that NOS DACS have less circuits and therefore less noise. That is a whole different can of worms.....

[beerandmusic]

10 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

You are making a huge assumption that may or may not be true

 

First you state it as a fact, that it is not true, and now you say "maybe".  You just like to hear yourself talk, and think you know as much as DAC engineers.  At least I said "I think" and "maybe it is the driver" and "I am not sure why"....

 

The only thing i said,  "is that to my ears, native resolution always sounds better than having the dac upsample, to the same resolution, in all of my testing.  Nothing was stated as a fact. 

 

I have little confidence in anything you say anymore....you just like to blow smoke in your fantasy land.

[davide256]

21 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

First you state it as a fact, that it is not true, and now you say "maybe".  You just like to hear yourself talk, and think you know as much as DAC engineers.  At least I said "I think" and "maybe it is the driver" and "I am not sure why"....

 

The only thing i said,  "is that to my ears, native resolution always sounds better than having the dac upsample, to the same resolution, in all of my testing.  Nothing was stated as a fact. 

 

I have little confidence in anything you say anymore....you just like to blow smoke in your fantasy land.

Agreed on the up-sampling. Its just a way of rounding irritating "edges", at the price of original micro detail. Whether in the DAC or through the source software, I've always found up sampling to be reminiscent of the "elevator music" school of sound. And most of the time, those irritating edges are your sign post to whether a change in the digital chain improved resolution, allowed you to hear what was muttered/hinted at before.

[firedog]

On 10/26/2017 at 5:04 AM, Speed Racer said:

 

That's assuming you like the McIntosh solid state "house sound"....which I do not. A lot of people don't! A lot do....

McIntosh definitely has a house sound, which I am sure they cultivate; that is, they tune the amps to give that sound to a greater or lesser extent. It part of their brand at this point. Nothing wrong with that. It's fine equipment and successful for decades.

I did read Bruno Putzey in an interview once say that he could voice his NCore amps to sound like McIntosh if he desired. Woudn't that be interesting? 

[AudioDoctor]

It is out of your price range, but I just bought a McIntosh MAC7200 Receiver, and it sounds amazing!