Is Mcintosh the most popular Hifi brand?

[Charles]

Originally Posted by KeithA0000

I don't know about 'most popular' - maybe most revered or most desired. For me, I've got a nice Technics amp, a nice Carver amp and a few others. They all sound fine to me. I found myself wanting up upgrade - but to what? Finally, I was eye-balling a couple of Marantz amps, and then... hey, what about a McIntosh? After a few months of hmmmm-ing and hawing, I finally bought an older MC2205. It's much more of an amp than I've ever had before, and oh my, is it HEAVY!! Just installed into my system this week. Looking forward to some time to test-listen for more than a few minutes...

Congrats! Mac really is a great brand. You get a half century of American engineering almost for free. If you had to start from scratch to create a Mac, your amp would cost many thousands of dollars more. Again absolute congrats and I hope that you get to have a good listen. Let us know what you think.

[Kuky]

Originally Posted by Charles

I absolutely know I need 120 watts on occasion from my Alexx. Most of the time 12 watts but put on Mahlers 6th and the volume of the D1100 on 75%, I need `120 watts. It is so clean and pure, it doesn't even sound loud but my oh my the ending will blast you out of your seat. It's what you pay the big bucks for. It's incredible. Last time I checked 10% of 1,200 watts which is the minimum power output of my 1.25KW's is 120 watts or within my 10% requirement. I note this requirement does not apply to tube amps. That's why tube watts are "bigger" watts than solid state watts. A 75 watt MC75 is therefore the equivalent of a 750 class AB solid state amp. A 2301 is a monster.

Hello, sorry to resurrect an old thread but I found this quite interesting.
I listened to a pair of Triangle Magellan Quatuor at the local Triangle/McIntosh dealer.

System for the audition was DCS Rossini Player/DAC + C1100 + 1,2kw monos. It was incredible so I have to have those speakers.

Now this Triangle Quatuors are difficult to drive, are quoted at 260w in 8ohms and are able to receive 500w peaks. They were measured to dip to 3ohms.

Of course my budget does not allow for such an expensive pream/amp combo and I was discussing with the dealer about a MC462 which I think should be more than enough. For preamp/DAC I would use an old Devialet D200 I have until I will have more money to upgrade.

But the dealer told me he has a second hand Mastersound Evolution 845 integrated tube amp (55W Class A) and he thinks that this tiny integrated is more than enough with those speakers (which I found hard to believe)

Obviously I will audition with both when my speakers arrive but I have 2 questions.

1. Why do you think tube watts are so much "bigger" than ss watts? Same principles should apply to both? Or maybe I am missing something? The only electrical difference I know is that tube amps soft clip when pushed too hard vs ss amps which will hard clip, possibly destroying the tweeters.

2. As I made my audition on 1,2kw monos should I expect a very bad surprise in terms of SQ when I downgrade to 462?

Thank you very much,
Cristian

[W9TR]

Tube watts being ‘bigger’ than SS watts is a bit of popular audio fiction. It is just that, fiction.

If both amps are being driven in their normal operating range, there is no difference. Zero. Nada.

But if you overdrive a tube amp, it will overload more gracefully than a SS amp of the same power rating. This is the soft vs hard clipping phenomena you mentioned.

But why run your amplifier into clipping in the first place? Seems kind of, well, stupid to me. Hi-Fi amps are not guitar amps, which are designed to go into clipping.

McIntosh amps have a ‘house sound’ that is similar across the range, so a 462 should sound similar to a 1.2 KW.

[PHC1]

I’ll just add to what Tom already mentioned above. Odd vs even order harmonics of tubes upon clipping, the later being much more “palatable” for the ears

Clipping is typically not an issue with the McIntosh Amps of either variety?

Damping factor between solid state and tube amps is often the biggest source of difference in the perceived power. What is technically a better control over the woofers with a solid state amp, vs a tube amp may be perceived as dry, less analog or powerful bass.

The “looser”, “fatter”, “rounder” more “analog” and often “tuneful” bass can be perceived as the more powerful watts of the tube amp.

[PHC1]

To expand on the topic. From elsewhere:

“The harmonic content of an overdriven tube amplifier consists primarily of 2nd order and 3rd order harmonics with some 4th order harmonics. The harmonic content of an overdriven transistor amplifier is primarily 3rd order with suppressed 2nd order harmonics. 2nd and 3rd order harmonics are the most important from a viewpoint of electronic distortion. Musically the 2nd harmonic is an octave above the fundamental and is almost inaudible, yet it adds body to the sound, making it fuller. The 3rd harmonic is a musical 12th. Instead of making the tone fuller, a strong 3rd harmonic makes the tone softer.

The odd harmonics (3rd, 5th, etc.) produce a "stopped" or "covered" sound. The even harmonics (2nd, 4th, etc.) produce a "choral" or "singing" sound. Adding a 5th to a strong 3rd harmonic give the sound a metallic quality that gets annoying in character as the amplitude increases. A strong 2nd with a strong 3rd harmonic tends to open the "covered" effect. Adding the 4th and 5th harmonics to this gives an "open horn" character. The higher harmonics, above the 7th, give the tone "edge" or "bite."



Full article http://www.tungsol.com/tungsol/html/faqs14.html

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Kuky

Hello, sorry to resurrect an old thread but I found this quite interesting.
I listened to a pair of Triangle Magellan Quatuor at the local Triangle/McIntosh dealer.

System for the audition was DCS Rossini Player/DAC + C1100 + 1,2kw monos. It was incredible so I have to have those speakers.

Now this Triangle Quatuors are difficult to drive, are quoted at 260w in 8ohms and are able to receive 500w peaks. They were measured to dip to 3ohms.

Of course my budget does not allow for such an expensive pream/amp combo and I was discussing with the dealer about a MC462 which I think should be more than enough. For preamp/DAC I would use an old Devialet D200 I have until I will have more money to upgrade.

But the dealer told me he has a second hand Mastersound Evolution 845 integrated tube amp (55W Class A) and he thinks that this tiny integrated is more than enough with those speakers (which I found hard to believe)

Obviously I will audition with both when my speakers arrive but I have 2 questions.

1. Why do you think tube watts are so much "bigger" than ss watts? Same principles should apply to both? Or maybe I am missing something? The only electrical difference I know is that tube amps soft clip when pushed too hard vs ss amps which will hard clip, possibly destroying the tweeters.

2. As I made my audition on 1,2kw monos should I expect a very bad surprise in terms of SQ when I downgrade to 462?

Thank you very much,
Cristian

Nothing that was said above is incorrect and all good points. However, Dan d'Agostino when he was CEO of Krell believed that the fundamental necessity for the best/optimal solid state sound was a 10% operating range for the amp. This is a generality but it's the rule I follow. Solid state amps are very different than tube amps in this regard. Essentially, you get the whole watt range with a really good tube amp. So a top notch tube amp rated at 150 watts/ch will give you even more than 150 "great" watts. Your sound will not become harsh or brittle even into clipping.

Not so with a solid state amp. As the SS amp approaches clipping you may notice an increase in harshness, etc. However, when operating within the optimal 10% range, I believe an excellent SS amp matches or beats an excellent tube amp because it will be much better on the bass and comparable or actually better in the mid and treble because of a better S/N ratio and better resolution.

Also, SS amps do a better job with insensitive speakers and low impedance loads.

Bottom line, I think you will be just fine with a 462 with this speaker. I would avoid that small tube amp. Mac SS amps are designed to sound like a tube amp and have great bass, neither over or under damped. But by all means audition both. However, remember that it takes months of listening to reliably determine the suitability of the amp/speaker interaction.

Best

Charles

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by Charles

Nothing that was said above is incorrect and all good points. However, Dan d'Agostino when he was CEO of Krell believed that the fundamental necessity for the best/optimal solid state sound was a 10% operating range for the amp. This is a generality but it's the rule I follow. Solid state amps are very different than tube amps in this regard. Essentially, you get the whole watt range with a really good tube amp. So a top notch tube amp rated at 150 watts/ch will give you even more than 150 "great" watts. Your sound will not become harsh or brittle even into clipping.

Not so with a solid state amp. As the SS amp approaches clipping you may notice an increase in harshness, etc. However, when operating within the optimal 10% range, I believe an excellent SS amp matches or beats an excellent tube amp because it will be much better on the bass and comparable or actually better in the mid and treble because of a better S/N ratio and better resolution.

Also, SS amps do a better job with insensitive speakers and low impedance loads.

Bottom line, I think you will be just fine with a 462 with this speaker. I would avoid that small tube amp. Mac SS amps are designed to sound like a tube amp and have great bass, neither over or under damped. But by all means audition both. However, remember that it takes months of listening to reliably determine the suitability of the amp/speaker interaction.

Best

Charles

Very good points Charles. Every transistor, hence gain device/stage has a sweet spot of operation. It is more evident when it comes to audio circuits than typically elsewhere. Nelson Pass wrote an excellent if a bit technical paper on it for the DIY folks on the sweet spot of the amplifier as well as getting into tubes. https://www.passlabs.com/technical_a...he-sweet-spot/

[Kuky]

Hello,

Thanks all for the responses, now I understand better what to expect. The only thing which I am not sure of is the difference in dynamics and SQ between 462 and 1,2kw monos. Normally the 462 should deliver easily more than the speakers can handle.

Regards,
Cristian

[PeterMusic]

Originally Posted by Kuky

Hello,

Thanks all for the responses, now I understand better what to expect. The only thing which I am not sure of is the difference in dynamics and SQ between 462 and 1,2kw monos. Normally the 462 should deliver easily more than the speakers can handle.

Regards,
Cristian

I think it's safe to say that 100% of us expect the 462 to sound amazing, and the 1.2's (at 2.5X the price) to sound even better.

Separately, I would expect a larger difference between these SS beauties and a tube amp or two. Better or worse would be a matter of taste. I don't know if the tube amp you mentioned is powerful enough to compete against the 462, but I think your dealer was right to ask the question.

Have fun choosing!

[Levitator]

I have had, and compared, the previous 452 against the 1.2KW Mac amps and can say that while the two amps had a similar sound signature, the 1.2KW did a better job at driving my speakers more effortlessly and as a consequence did sound better than the 452. My speakers however were the 800D3’s which were deserved of larger amplifiers with more ‘juice’. I would say that speakers will have influence on your ability to access what the bigger amps are able to ultimately deliver to the speakers...

Either amp will do a great job - the upside of the 462 is the space you save, not to mention you will save your back by not having to move the 1.2’s!