McIntosh vs Marantz

Mr. Bubbles

I have historically been a Marantz fan as i really enjoy the what many people refer to as that "Marantz sound". I have fellow stereophile in my area that wants to sell me a McIntosh MC-2105 in good condition. I have always heard great things about Mac's but have never heard one. I am trying to determine how this will sound compared to what i am used to listening to. I know that much of this hobby is very subjective but there is definately a difference in sound of many of these older amplifiers and other equipment. I am currently using Marantz gear on 3 of my 2 channel systems and Adcom on my SRS's.

Has anyone experienced both of these brands in the past and can anyone help me determine where the sound of the mac may fall in comparison to the Marantz, or maybe even some of the other 70's-early 80's equipment like Phase Linear, Carver, Sansui, etc. i am just most familiar with the Marantz.

If it helps, some Marantz amps that I currently own are the 1060B, 1090, 1152DC, 140, 170DC.

mhardy6647

As the owner of an MC-2100 (virtually identical to the 2105 save for the cosmetics and big blue meters of the latter)... I continue to wonder what all the fuss is about vis-a-vis the solid state, autoformer-coupled Macs. I find it to be very harsh and grainy sounding, not that much different than other, earlier solid state stuff. My MC-2100 is in a box in the attic (no mean feat; it's a hefty beast); the only reason I still have it is that folks pay stupid money for them - if I ever need some quick cash, I can move it along...

Now, if you want to talk about superlative McIntosh sound... seek out an MC-225, a pair of MC-30s or even an MC-275 (the latter still in production, by the way).

Oh, and for Marantz... the 8B is the sine qua non for me (although, truth be told, I've never heard a Marantz 9).

Others will disagree :-)

Face

I'm not sure about being harsh, but unrefined and grainy sound about right..IMO of course.

If it hasn't been already, it would need to be serviced by now too.

heiney9

Will your friend allow you to demo it in your rig? Or is it simply a cash and carry type of deal? The best advice is to get your ears on it for ahwile in your own rig. That is rarely possible w/o buying it, but if he is a friend perhaps he'll oblige. It's been so long since I've heard Mac and Marantz that I can't really offer an informed opinion on the sound that would be worth anything.

H9

mhardy6647

Face wrote: »

I'm not sure about being harsh, but unrefined and grainy sound about right..IMO of course.

If it hasn't been already, it would need to be serviced by now too.

I should qualify my remarks... my reference point here is a pair of Klipsch Cornwalls -- which are very sensitive and kind of aggressive anyway (I am being diplomatic). The Mac MC-2100, a C-28 preamp and a Sansui TU-717 basically came for free with the Cornwalls. The Mac amp was awful on the Cornies... just awful. Switched to a single-ended EL84-family amplifier (Decware "Zen" SE-84B) and things were much, much better. Ended up using the Cornies for a decade with single-ended 2A3 amplification but ditched them quickly after acquiring a pair of Altec Valencias.

PS the C-28 is no great hifi bargain, either...

Face

Having owned their vintage and newer(within the last 5 years) preamps, I'm not really a fan either, you could do much worse though. Their newer amps are light years better than the vintage stuff though. And I wouldn't mind owning one of their newer CDP's either.

mhardy6647

Face wrote: »

Having owned their vintage and newer(within the last 5 years) preamps, I'm not really a fan either, you could do much worse though. Their newer amps are light years better than the vintage stuff though. And I wouldn't mind owning one of their newer CDP's either.

I am perfectly willing to believe that :-)

I 'd opine that everyone who loves music and its reproduction owes it to him/herself to listen to one of the classic Mac vacuum tube amps, though...

Face

Twice I've passed up good deals on MC-275's because my speakers wouldn't be a great match. I'm in the midst of designing a couple of higher efficiency speakers right now, so who knows what the future will bring.

Mr. Bubbles

Mhardy

Much of the reading I've done seems to be inline with your description when used on speakers such as the Klipsch. The speakers seem to be so efficient that they allow you to turn the volume very little and get into the power portion of the amp that it sounds it's best. This seems to be across the board with Klipsch owners for the most part, at least from the reading I've done. Though the Klipsch are great speakers I am not a big fan and therefore most of my speakers are not nearly as efficient. This would require the amp to supply more power than it would on the horns.

I'm not sure how this effects the sound of the amp, it's just what I've read.

Face,

you agree that they are unrefined and grainy. How would you compare that to some of the other vintage equipment i mentioned first. just to help me get a point of reference since there is so much subjection in this hobby.

H9

No I would not be able to audition it in my system. This person is not really a good friend so much as an acquaintance I've met through previous equipment purchases, and system discussions.

The purchase would actually be for several pieces of equipment. This just seems to be the most impressionable piece in the bunch.

The list would include.
McIntosh MC 2105
McIntosh MQ101
Carver C-500 slight hum in the sound.(My guess would be a power supply cap but possibly something else).
Rotel RC 870
Rusound SS-4 speaker selector


I don't really want to spend the cash and don't need any of the equipment but also think I may be able to flip some of it and make a little, if I decided not to keep any, or part of it. I'm just not good at getting off my rear doing the e-bay thing.

Face

I'm not too familiar with vintage Marantz, never owned a piece. Their newer gear has a nice sound to it though, smooth and refined.

mhardy6647

The Marantz 8B is one of the best sounding commercially-produced amplifiers I've ever heard. Full stop. Just sayin'.

FWIW never been a big fan of the solid state Marantz equipment, whether from old Saul himself (the Marantz 18 and 19), Superscope (the 22** series), or Philips. All perfectly OK but also perfectly uninspiring sounding to me.

Who else has owned the name Marantz, anyone I am forgetting?

leftwinger57

I do have fond memories of the pairing of a Mac 2105-C-28 pre/amp a Dual 1229 and a pair of ESS Heil AMT10s. This was mid to late 70s and if you had the cash this is what you would get. On the other side of the coin another friend of mine went the way of the Marantz 2300 reciever line and hung Bose 901s from the ceiling.
Me I had a Lafyette tuner/amp w/ Criterion spkr and also a Dual 12129 tt.

cnh

I'm not sure that I've heard those particular models but I have heard some reasonably pricey SS McIntosh equipment amps/pres/CDPs and I'm still scratching my head as to 'why' so many have so much praise for this stuff!!

But again, that's me. And the problem is that I 'expect' to hear vast improvements over my more modest gear that I just 'don't' hear. I don't hear 10,000 dollars or more better sound. In fact, there are far lower cost amps that I actually prefer. Is it the 'name' or is it just 'me', I wonder?

Heck, it must be 'me', I'm just a Cretan; because surely the lofty McIntosh has got to be magnificent!

Everyone 'says' 'so'!

cnh

mhardy6647

not sure if you are a cretin (although I doubt it) but if you were a Cretan, I think you'd know! :-)

Just ask ol' Epimenides... although it's hard to tell whether that paradoxical guy was lyin' or truthin'...

cnh

Actually, some of my ancestors may well have been Cretans. Sas efharisto poli!

But it is more likely a typo.

cnh

skrol

I don't know about being a Cretan but I sometimes feel like a Crustacean, especially in the morning before I've had my coffee.
Stan

erniejade

I had a 2105, adcom fga555, onkyo integra i think it was a 5030 or 5080 I cant remember,Carver tfm35X, and a sunfire 300X2 all at the same time.

The McIntosh 2105 beat the 555 in sound quality but, I think the Integra sounded better than the McIntosh!. The 35X was between the Integra and the McIntosh The 300X2 sounded better than the other 4 and its still in my system.

Mr. Bubbles

erniejade wrote: »

I had a 2105, adcom fga555, onkyo integra i think it was a 5030 or 5080 I cant remember,Carver tfm35X, and a sunfire 300X2 all at the same time.

The McIntosh 2105 beat the 555 in sound quality but, I think the Integra sounded better than the McIntosh!. The 35X was between the Integra and the McIntosh The 300X2 sounded better than the other 4 and its still in my system.

Thanks,
That gives me at least some general comparison to gear I have heard before. I also am using the Adcom GFA-555II. It runs my SRS's well but does sound a little "dry" and "anesthetic" to me. It is very clean and detailed however.

erniejade

I forgot to add i had a 1060 a long long time ago. I thought it was a nice warm sounding amp but by now, im sure it would need a re-cap The 140 is also a solid amp ( love the looks of the meeters also LOL )

To me it would be down to either the 140 or the 170dc you currently have. I dont honestly think changing from the 140 or 170dc to the 2105 you will gain anything.

Joe08867

oliverbubbles wrote: »

Thanks,
That gives me at least some general comparison to gear I have heard before. I also am using the Adcom GFA-555II. It runs my SRS's well but does sound a little "dry" and "anesthetic" to me. It is very clean and detailed however.

Adcom's have that tendancy. Can be very good for certain speakers.

If you are looking for a warmer or less sterile sound than Carver, B&K and Rotel should be on your list.

I am a big fan of B&K, very warm not generic and not grainy in the least. They can run warm though.

If you want to move to the next level than Odyssey, Pass Labs and a few others are way better.

audiocr381ve

Joe08867 wrote: »

Adcom's have that tendancy. Can be very good for certain speakers.

If you are looking for a warmer or less sterile sound than Carver, B&K and Rotel should be on your list.

I am a big fan of B&K, very warm not generic and not grainy in the least. They can run warm though.

If you want to move to the next level than Odyssey, Pass Labs and a few others are way better.

Which B&K's do you like Joeseph?

George Grand

I am Cretan. Cool it, and stop dropping names Hardy.

rdb2001

audiocr381ve wrote: »

Which B&K's do you like Joeseph?

I am a big fan of B&K also. I use their amps to drive my martin logans in my hometheater/2channel hybrid system. I have the Ref 200.2 2 channel amp. You should maybe look for 200.2 or the ref 2220 or the ref 4420. They all have the same specs and just are older versions of the 200.2. If you can find them, B&K also made a 200.1 monoblock. There is a pair on the gon but they are overpriced in my opinion. You can find any of those 2 channel version btw 450-600 on the used sound

Joe08867

audiocr381ve wrote: »

Which B&K's do you like Joeseph?

I have had a few. And I miss them all.

The ST2020 was the most recent and is the one I used with my SDA2's forever until I got my Exposure 3010s integrated.

The EX4420 was what I used before the ST2020 when I had my Klipschorns. Way overkill for them but dynamics that could not be beat.

All time favorite and first B&K amp was the M200. Had it factory configured to produce 100 Class A watts. For it's power output it is the smoothest, warmest, most dynamic, and utterly boiling hot amp I have ever owned. Used that with the Khorns and then LaScala's and then with a set of Heresy's. I was downsizing when I sold it off. I should have kept that one. I also used it with a set of Apogee Mini Grand's. I loved it with the Apogees but it ran way hot.

PS just call me Joe, My mom called me Joseph when she was mad.

ddsski

Let's break this into 2 areas.
Amps To me hands down Macintosh. Dynamic headroom and bulletproof construction make them a LONG term investment. Did I mention investment! I have had a pair of Carver M200t's forever as well but the musicality of the Mac MC352 is beyond compare. I compare the 2 because i used to run the carvers as 2 mono amps (350wts each) before I got into biamping. Both amps are being compared with Polk LSi15's. I have used Mac amps since the late 70's.
As far as electronics are concerned I have different viewpoint. 4.5 yrs ago I bought a used Mac MX134 as I was just getting into surround. Great piece ~8000 new, bought used fully refurbed for $4300. So much for holding their value. When HDMI 1.4 came out it just got sold for $1795. Dropped 2 grand in one year!! Ouch. Amps value went up in contrast. Mac was getting a bit onory at times. Just bought a Marantz AV7005. Sound blows the old Macintosh technology away!!! Tech is changing so fast your biggest hit will be in your preamp. Why pay $8000 for a MacMX150 when the Marantz sounds awesome. Are the newer DAC's really that much better in the Mac than the Marantz??

Mr. Bubbles

I did make the purchase as much for an investment as to listen to the equipment and gain experience for my own ears. As mentioned previously the bundle included,

McIntosh MC 2105
McIntosh MQ101
Carver C-500 with hum in the sound.
Rotel RC 870
Rusound SS-4 speaker selector

The price for all was MUCH less than what just the MC 2105's are going on the Bay for currently. I'll get some listening in when i have time to make the switch in one of my rigs.

leftwinger57

sorry should have included this in my other post. Be very careful w/ the glass and bubbling w/ the Macs. beyond that I would take that 2105 in a heartbeat and trade my Adcom gfa555 ,maybe.

tonyb

Not me, wouldn't consider it exactly Mac's best foot forward.....so to speak.

leftwinger57

If they were good enough for the Dead as a road worthy amp about 50 2300s then maybe their home products were just as good only looked better and was down a little on the wattage.I think their quality control , their family lineage and proven both by specs and demos sealed the deal for them. The Marantz crowd I just do not think they had the coin or they also would went w/ a MAC2100undressed or the 2105 fully outfitted w/ the walnut case. a great looking amp for sure.Saying all that a Marantz 2275 w/some 901s hanging from the ceiling was another way to go.

Hawkeye

Hmmmmm, thought I might chime in on this thread. If you read my sig, you'll see I'm a Mc diehard. Not a fanboy by any means, I just prefer the sound of the total package. Are they the best? To my ears they are, to others, not so much so and I can accept any opinion on the gear.

I consider the gear in my rack to be a bit (lot) laid back and warm and frankly a bit mushy and soft. That is the sound I like. My advice to you is give the piece a try and see if it is what you want/need/desire. There is no right or wrong answer.

Gordon