Originally Posted by joey_v
Here is a snippet:
This will be just a quick review, but I wanted to log my thoughts so atleast I could reference to this some time later when my memory becomes foggy.
I went to my dealer and brought my Classe M600 monoblocks to compare to the Mcintosh 601 monoblocks. I thought it was a fair comparison on a system that I was pretty familiar with.
We ran the Mcintosh 550 CD Player into the MC52 preamp into each of the monoblocks and then into the BW 802D3. We used Audioquest NRG4 power cables, AQ IC (I forget which), and AQ Oak speaker wires.
There were 3 of us there, so we took turns listening and listened to a variety of music.
Introduction:
The Classe M600 and the Mcintosh are well matched. Both operate at 600w into 8ohm, the Macs function with autoformers so it is a stagnant 600w into any load, there are variable taps in the back of the amp where you plug in the speaker wires depending on the nominal impedance of the speaker you are wanting to drive. The Classe M600 are your typical amplifier with increasing power output as the impedance drops... 600w into 8, 1200w into 4, etc.
Build:
Both are built extremely well. To put a Rotel or Parasound next to either just amplifies (no pun intended) the difference in the build and casing of the top shelf amps against the lower hi-fi amps. To rap your knuckle against the casing of either the Mac or Classe, you can tell that some thought has gone into the design and the overall feel of these top shelf amps.
Listening:
Honestly I did not know which would sound better, so we just went ahead and plugged either one and started listening. We took turns and ran through some CDs, we'd usually listen to the whole track because both sounded so good.
Sound:
The overall consensus was this -
Classe M600
- More dynamic
- Better bass
- Sharper edges of detail
- Slightly live-lier sound than the Mac.
- Imaging of the voice was not as good.
- Staging of the vocalist was surprisingly not as forward.
Mcintosh 601
- Not as dynamic, slight slurring of transients, especially heard with the presence of high hats, etc.
- Bass was not as present, but warmer overall feel
- Detail was there, but you can tell, it was rounder. Images especially gave a sense that it was more "analog" for lack of a better term.
- The sound was less "live" relative to the Classe. If you were to compare, it was like a small jazz club at a nice venue, whereas the Classe was like a party happening.
- Smoother edges of imaging.
- Staging of mid-stage/middle vocalist was presented in a more forward position than on the Classe.
- Imaging was very good
Conclusion:
I was very surprised to hear that the Mcintosh 601 presented the vocalist in a very forward manner, with the voice image at the appropriate height, and with good amount of air around the instruments. I thought the warmer presentation of the Mac was a welcome change for the lively 802D3 speakers, so I thought that the roundness of the imaging, the roundness of the sound, and the more blunted edges of detail was a good match for the diamond-based D3 unit.
I was just taken a-back by the forward staging, it was not something I expected. You would expect a warmer amp or warmer component to present the stage slightly behind the speaker plane, but not the Mcintosh 601. We all agreed, the forward staging combined with the warmer sound but still filled with detail was a very good combo.
In the end, it was a split.
1 of us liked the Classe on the D3.
2 of us liked the Mac on the D3.
Overall, it was a good experience, it's not every day you get to hear 2 juggernauts in the same room, in the same system, under similar circumstances.
Now I have a good idea of what's what.
|