Tube and Solid State
 

Hoping for some feedback on something I have thought about for a few years. I currently have a 2600 preamp and 1.2kw’s and am happy with the sound. I’ve been wondering what differences I might have if I tried a solid state preamp? There is nice clarity now - has anyone A/B’d this?

For many years when i have auditioned McIntosh products, the following held true for me. McIntosh solid state sounds like tubes and tubes sound like solid state. Especially when it came to McIntosh preamps. :yes: My favorite? C46 and c1000. Awesome, liquid and oh so musical... :music:

Ankkor-

You have a great combination with the 2600/1.2's.

Personally I prefer a tube Mc pre-amp to solid state. The only thing you might consider is an 1100 pre-amp. This would require also buying a DAC (if you use one) as well.

Before making such a move, an audition of the 2600 and 1100 as well as a solid state unit is a must. In the end it's all very subjective. Again, you have an outstanding pre-amp so approach the chase of upgrade with caution.

Consider the C 1100; McIntosh’s latest two box tube preamp. Super quiet, fully balanced, with that glorious valve midrange and none of drawbacks. Outstanding phono section as well.

Agree with John and W9TR. Several years ago I chided Mac for not having a reference SS pre. Their response was the C1100 was the best pre they knew how to make. PHC1 is correct when he says Mac tubes and SS sound similar. Years ago when SS was just coming out Mac's goal was to make their SS sound identical to their tubes, their goal being superb sound plus added reliability. Mac's an old company. They succeeded. I like my 1.25 a lot better than my older 1.2. It sounds the way I remember my MC275 sounded years ago. If you want the ultimate pre the C1100 is the unit. I personally would stay away from the DAC modules. But that's just me. I remember as a kid I heard the first SS C24. It sounded bright noisy and brittle compared to my Dad's C22. Not even close. One of the very best SS vintage Mac pre's was the little known or respected C29. It was a truly quiet pre.

Best

Charles

____________________
Charles Updated System: Wilson McIntosh Audioquest
Most recent updates: AQ Diamond USB replaces AQ Coffee; Wilson Audio Specialties Alexx replaced by Wilson Audio Specialties XVX Chronosonic; new subwoofer crossover; new Galaxy Grey Thors Hammer; Wilson Pedestals
Amps: McIntosh 1.25KW’s (3) set on floor on custom made cultured marble slabs
Preamp and DAC: McIntosh D1100
Sources: McIntosh MCD1100 SACD player, MVP881 BR player, MVP851 DVD player, MR87 tuner, Marantz 510LV Laser Disc player, ASUS laptop USB (JRiver Media Center 23)
Speakers: Wilson Audio Specialties XVX Chronosonic
Sub-woofer: Wilson Audio Specialties Thor’s Hammer (1) horizontal lie and Wilson Watch Controller (abbr: WC)
Cables main system: Audioquest Wel Signature speaker cables and balanced IC (preamp to amps); Wel Signature AES/EBU balanced digital IC for CD playback; Audioquest Diamond optical (1) for tuner, (1) for BR player, and (1) for LD player for total of (3); Diamond USB cable; McIntosh MCT cable for SACD playback; Dragon power cords (5 HC cords and 3 source cords for total of 8); Thunder HC power cord for tuner; cables for DVD player not listed
Cables subwoofer system: Audioquest Redwood speaker cable (1); Wolf balanced subwoofer IC from WC to amp; Wind balanced IC from preamp to WC; Hurricane HC (2) and Dragon HC (1) power cords
Power conditioners: Audioquest Niagara 7000 (1) and Niagara 5000 (3); (4) dedicated 20-amp lines with no. 10 wire straight out of fuse box
Isolation: Wilson Pedestals
Cabinet: Double Custom Woodwork & Design (CWD) solid walnut cabinet on large casters; holds all sources and preamp; also, Niagara 7000; 11 feet minimum distance from speakers
Acoustic Treatments: Room and Echo Tunes
AC: Dedicated to this room only, an ultra-high efficiency and quiet recently installed Ruud split system 3-ton heat pump.
Room (mancave): 40’L x 15.5’W A-frame; max ceiling height 8’ min 5’; wall within wall construction built of 2 x 6’s; built over garage with custom hardwood floor with gym seal with over 40 Lowes stiffened wooden I-beams supporting floor; complete isolation from rest of house

If it's from McIntosh, it's almost sure to sound terrific. But I disagree that their tube and solid state amps sound identical. It's been a few years since I picked my C22, but it was immediately apparent to me that the sound was warmer and fuller than the Mc SS I heard (can't remember the model number). I would guess that most readers of our forum would also hear the difference right away.

Just to be clear--this is not to say one is better or worse. I leave that to individual taste.

I've had 3 Mac preamps a C712, a C220 and a C47. To me they all sounded more or less the same but the C712 and the C47 had much less noise. The C220 hissed pretty badly but the C712 and C47 were very quiet. In retrospect it could be that my C220 had bad tubes since it was a dealer display and I have no idea how many hours were on it. Regardless I really don't think there's a huge difference in the sound between various McIntosh preamps. That said I do kinda miss the C220 and I'm seriously considering replacing my C47 with either a C22, C2300/C2500/C2600/C2700 or one of the new C8s.

Peter, I agree. I owned a C1000 SS. In the Stereophile review the remark was made how similar the tube pre and SS pre sounded. The tube pre was more warm and relaxed.

Mac pre's have a neutral sound. The difference in Mac pre's becomes apparent as you upgrade to better sources, amps, and speakers. Many like to drop a piece into their system and get "blown away". Many times their ancillary gear is mediocre and 6mo to a year later they are looking for that next "blown away" experience with another piece of gear.

Nothing wrong with that. It's what scratches your itch that counts. Folks are always looking to improve their sound. I want folks to enjoy their systems but just remember, folks may not provide follow up, and what works in their system may not improve yours.

That's why I like sound signatures. Mine are Wilson, AQ, and Mac. Are their better and much more expensive gear available? Of course. But I like to stay within my sound signatures while trying to improve my system. If I had gone hog wild with amplification and digital sources, I would not have been able to afford my speakers. Almost no one has an unlimited budget. I think Wilson the best speaker manufacturer in the world. I think Mac and AQ are competitive with the best and relatively inexpensive. Have a long term plan for improvement and wait until that special piece of gear comes out that you really want. Meanwhile, enjoy the music.

Best

Charles

Ankkor,
Demo'ing the C1100, as Tom (W9TR) suggests may be your best bet. I just upgraded from a C2500 to the C1100, and got more soundstage (depth especially) and clearer mids "out of the box". No regrets. As a point of reference, here's a synopsis of my preamps and amps since I got my first Mc amps in 2008:

Yamaha receiver -> MC501s
MX136 (C146 "core") -> MC501s
C2500 -> MC501s
C2500 -> MC2301s
C1100 -> MC2301s

Each step brought an improvement, along with a myriad of changes to the sources and speakers, as well as a move thrown in. Your MC1.2s probably would take well to the C1100s. Good luck, and let us know what you are thinking, and what you do.

I’m thinking it might be fun to get a D1100 and use it as a stand-alone preamp/DAC for a year. At that point I could get the C1100 and use the D1100 as it’s DAC. Only reservation is the D1100 has been out awhile so I’m wondering if a new reference DAC is on the horizon.