New McIntosh ML1 Mk II

[ken]

wow, that sounds cool. Glad they sold out. wonder how many they made?

[Formerly YB-2]

Originally Posted by miatadan

I am considering these speakers as would eliminate needing subwoofer.
Also like the idea of sealed cabinet.
This design looks more appealing than the XR100 with so many drivers. Not a fan of gloss finish.

Also looked at the JBL L100 classic but not crazy about made in China.

Maybe because of my age, prefer the retro looks.

Dan

Definitely agree on all points and especially the JBL L100 (and all JBL's). Happy for McIntosh to have "sold out". Now, if they would just make another run of the MC75 at a reasonable price (but, what is 'reasonable' in this crazy hobby these days? ).

[Charles]

Originally Posted by ken

wow, that sounds cool. Glad they sold out. wonder how many they made?

I didn't ask. One thing I left out: The grills are quite transparent and don't significantly affect the sonics. The new ML1 will be an extremely powerful beautiful speaker. I think it will be competitive with most of the McIntosh line.

Best

Charles

[PeterMusic]

Originally Posted by Formerly YB-2

Definitely agree on all points and especially the JBL L100 (and all JBL's). Happy for McIntosh to have "sold out". Now, if they would just make another run of the MC75 at a reasonable price (but, what is 'reasonable' in this crazy hobby these days? ).

I think the "problem" with the MC75 is the MC275. I've read plenty of reports (here) that 2X MC75 is the better sounding solution, not disputing that. But with an excellent MC275 and no close competitors, they'd just be cannibalizing themselves for all but the die-hards. Much better from a business perspective to put the resources into something that will get them significant incremental volume

[Charles]

We all have our favorites that we would like to see reissued. However, it's not going to happen. There are apparently plenty of Mac vintage "small" power amps out there on the market for sale. I have it from a good source that a new MC275 run mono sounds better than run stereo and that if it doesn't the amp needs service. So buy two MC275's. Run them mono and you have much more power than from a MC75 reissue. BTW, I owned two MC75's. They were great amps. It was my biggest mistake that I traded them for a new solid state stereo Mac amp. I am upset with my old dealer to this day for not advising me to to keep these beautiful amps. He eagerly took my amps. I was young and didn't understand their value.

Best

Charles

[Formerly YB-2]

Originally Posted by Charles

I have it from a good source that a new MC275 run mono sounds better than run stereo and that if it doesn't the amp needs service

Best

Charles

Whether you consider me "a good source", or not............. I've run one MC275, two MC275s as monoblocks and a pair of MC75s (reissue) and, to my ears there is no comparison. The MC75 pair is superior to the MC275 run as a stereo amp and the the MC275 as a stereo amp is superior to a pair of MC275s run as mono amps. The difference is not huge, but certainly noticeable. Obviously, YMMV, but that is what my ears told me when I was running an MC2200 and McIntosh tube amps. Eventually I'll find a pair of MC75 reissue amps for what I'm willing to spend.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Formerly YB-2

Whether you consider me "a good source", or not............. I've run one MC275, two MC275s as monoblocks and a pair of MC75s (reissue) and, to my ears there is no comparison. The MC75 pair is superior to the MC275 run as a stereo amp and the the MC275 as a stereo amp is superior to a pair of MC275s run as mono amps. The difference is not huge, but certainly noticeable. Obviously, YMMV, but that is what my ears told me when I was running an MC2200 and McIntosh tube amps. Eventually I'll find a pair of MC75 reissue amps for what I'm willing to spend.

What was the difference in the sonics? Also, there's the question of the physical shape all the amps were in at that time. What do you mean by "reissue" MC75's. I assume you mean a pair of MC75's that has been completely reworked by a specialist and then re-issued as "new". Did you own these amps when you heard them or was it an audition? I wish that I had never parted with mine. Back in my day there was no such thing as "reissue". I owned original MC75's and a MC275 for years. Never changed a tube or had a service. The amps worked perfectly 100% reliable. Apparently from an engineering standpoint, the MC275 is designed to work equally well in mono or stereo. That's a definitive not debatable statement/fact, according to my friend. I myself don't remember any difference between a vintage MC275 and a vintage MC75 and I owned both of them for good lengths of time.

Perhaps someone else might comment concerning this question whose had experience. There's numerous variables involved. There's the vintage Mac tube sound vs the modern tube sound, etc. But again, I was told definitively that the MC275 vintage or modern was designed to run equally well in mono or stereo but of course you receive the added benefit of twice the power in mono. Many modern speakers require a larger tube amp than a MC75.

Best

Charles

[Formerly YB-2]

Originally Posted by Charles

What was the difference in the sonics? Also, there's the question of the physical shape all the amps were in at that time. What do you mean by "reissue" MC75's. I assume you mean a pair of MC75's that has been completely reworked by a specialist and then re-issued as "new". Did you own these amps when you heard them or was it an audition? I wish that I had never parted with mine. Back in my day there was no such thing as "reissue". I owned original MC75's and a MC275 for years. Never changed a tube or had a service. The amps worked perfectly 100% reliable. Apparently from an engineering standpoint, the MC275 is designed to work equally well in mono or stereo. That's a definitive not debatable statement/fact, according to my friend. I myself don't remember any difference between a vintage MC275 and a vintage MC75 and I owned both of them for good lengths of time.

Perhaps someone else might comment concerning this question whose had experience. There's numerous variables involved. There's the vintage Mac tube sound vs the modern tube sound, etc. But again, I was told definitively that the MC275 vintage or modern was designed to run equally well in mono or stereo but of course you receive the added benefit of twice the power in mono. Many modern speakers require a larger tube amp than a MC75.

Best

Charles

Reissue means just that. The original MC75 & MC275 were made from '61-70. All others are "reissue", as were mine from about 10yr ago.
I purchased my MC275 MkIV from Gordon Gow's son, Frank Gow (may he RIP) at Audio Classics, along with a C2200.
Liked what I heard with the C2200/MC275MkIV, so decided to try two of the MC275s running as monoblocks. Frank told me some folks like them as such and some don't. I fell into the "don't" category.
Was using Joseph Audio RM-25XLs and Krell speakers (forgotten the model #) at the time.
Had more money then brains, so decided to try an MC2102. Frank warned me that I might not care for it as it was decidedly 'different' from an MC275. We made a deal that I would hold on to the MC275 while I tried the MC2102. He was right. The MC2102 went back after a bit of tube-rolling could not fix what was wrong.
About a year later Frank called to alert me to the reissue MC75, which he had on hold for me (if I wanted). I gave them a try and they were a step up from the single MC275 in stereo.
Don't miss the C2200 (the C22 MkV is a most worthy replacement). However, I do miss the reissue MC75 monoblocks and will eventually own another pair.
Have made several attempts at 'downsizing' into retirement over the past several years. All have been abject failures. No more of that for me.
My plan is to die with the C22 & a pair of MC75s. My wife can bury them with my ashes or sell all and take a great vacation (a better choice then burying).
As an aside, my new Devore 0/93 are scheduled for delivery Monday before lunch. I'm doing my best to not be excited.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Formerly YB-2

Reissue means just that. The original MC75 & MC275 were made from '61-70. All others are "reissue", as were mine from about 10yr ago.
I purchased my MC275 MkIV from Gordon Gow's son, Frank Gow (may he RIP) at Audio Classics, along with a C2200.
Liked what I heard with the C2200/MC275MkIV, so decided to try two of the MC275s running as monoblocks. Frank told me some folks like them as such and some don't. I fell into the "don't" category.
Was using Joseph Audio RM-25XLs and Krell speakers (forgotten the model #) at the time.
Had more money then brains, so decided to try an MC2102. Frank warned me that I might not care for it as it was decidedly 'different' from an MC275. We made a deal that I would hold on to the MC275 while I tried the MC2102. He was right. The MC2102 went back after a bit of tube-rolling could not fix what was wrong.
About a year later Frank called to alert me to the reissue MC75, which he had on hold for me (if I wanted). I gave them a try and they were a step up from the single MC275 in stereo.
Don't miss the C2200 (the C22 MkV is a most worthy replacement). However, I do miss the reissue MC75 monoblocks and will eventually own another pair.
Have made several attempts at 'downsizing' into retirement over the past several years. All have been abject failures. No more of that for me.
My plan is to die with the C22 & a pair of MC75s. My wife can bury them with my ashes or sell all and take a great vacation (a better choice then burying).
As an aside, my new Devore 0/93 are scheduled for delivery Monday before lunch. I'm doing my best to not be excited.

Thank you for the comprehensive reply. Now I understand. We both regret terribly, trading our MC75's. You are a tube man with great experience with tubes. I never liked tubes or vinyl. I like prerecorded tapes much better and think all the hype concerning vinyl just that, hype. I've cleaned all the needles using a magnifying glass, put up with the record scratch and warp/rumble etc. and now the truth about it is out, the vast majority of vinyl has a digital step.

But I have to admit that tubes are a different story. I fell in love with the huge solid state amp prematurely. I believe that I have repressed memories of the beautiful Mac vintage tube sound that have been uncovered by experiencing my MC3500's. In my older age I "think" I understand somewhat why folks like you like tubes so much.

While typing this reply I am listening to Jazz In the Key of Blue by the Jimmy Cobb Quartet through my 3500's on SACD. It's a different presentation than through my 1.25's from top to bottom. "Huge" is a very strong word that you used but I think I may understand why you used it. When you hear the sound you love anything else pales by comparison. However, I also believe that that it is possible that the sonics my 1.25's provide may be preferred by someone else's ear, although I don't see how.

Take a digital master and put it on vinyl and you obtain the vinyl sound. Vinyl has a characteristic sonic signature that many like very much. The same is true I believe for tubes. For me the 3500 has meant rediscovering the sonics of my much younger years and childhood. But I think I'm pretty much a novice when it comes to tubes compared to you.

Absolute congrats on your new Devore's. They have received super reviews. I recently went to their website. I'll bet their 4 piece statement system is competitive with anything on the market.

Best

Charles

[audiogear]

Saw an unboxing video of the ML1 MkIIs, they do look impressive and thumbs up on the retro design IMO.