MA7900 vs. Luxman 505ux / or 550ax

redux

New Member
Hi Folks,

I know this is a MAC forum, but I do have a dilemma choosing integrated amplifier - and after some researching and benchmarking I am left with 3 integrated amplifiers on my list:

- Macintosh 7900
- Luxman 505ux
- Luxman 550ax

Did some of you have issues choosing integrated amplifier? Any good ideas or experiences?

The following is my last benchmark/listening between MA-7900 and Luxman 505ux. If you disagree, or want to give me some further inputs, please let me know to balance my limited impression from 2 hours with listening:

(I am going to use it for Quad ESL 63, and later a new pair of Quads or Martin Logan Ethos or Theos)

My thoughts during listing to the amps:

Mcintosh 7900:

- Every seller I have talked to, with only one exception, tends to not like Mcintosh to much. For them this brand is the Harley Davidson vs Ducati, the less sophisticated red wines from US vs. the very best from Burgund/France and so on. The final comparison was "Caddilac vs. Porch 911 "(Guess which car they prefer here in Europe.. )

For me, well, The MA 7900, is wonderful in the middle range. The vocals, the guitar, the saxs are so present. The dynamics are very good. I almost found myself in a concert hall listing to a live performance.

I have heard that the new Mcintosh gear has become more Hi-End and comparable with Japanese and european quality the last 5 to 6 years. This may be very true from my point of view as well - and even the built in DAC sounds good. However, I believe the bass is more "loose", and high tones are (maybe) a bit more harsh, and the soundstage is not quite? as good compared to Luxman. I would say that the MA-7900 is has a more "contrast"/ more deep for the good and for the bad. But, I was really challenged by the MA-7900. It was guitars and vocals "in your face"/1st row - That part i loved. Is it not trying to be the perfect ballerina, but a very sophisticated rock & pop musician loving what he/she does. Ok, enough with stupid comparisons. The the final:

- Luxman 505ux:

Silky sound, very good soundstage & good bass control. The higher sounds are as well detailed but not harsh to the ears (I find some SS very annoying on ESLs). For instance, for classical music this amp is very enjoyable - you can place every sound in the orchestra, and all the sounds are harmonic and fit together in the sound picture/soundstage. It is a pure joy to listen to this amp. I have to agree with the people that claims that the soundstage is very "wide" and detailed, but perhaps not to dynamic and "deep". (to describe sound is just as difficult to describe taste in food... ).

The weakness in my opinion is some lack of dynamics in the midrange. Yes, everything is "silky" but i would have wished that the vocalist was a bit more present. The soundstage is almost too perfect and in harmony, if I am allowed to say such a thing.. It is both very enjoyable, but also a bit boring at the same time. For opera and Jazz music for instance, things where a bit dry. I would like to listen more tough... It it really a very good map!



Summary:



Luxman 505ux:

+ Silky sound
+Perfect soundstage
+ No need to go to classical concerts anymore - just perfect.
+ Very detailed sound and bass control
+ Very good with all kind of music - but IMO perfect with classical music
- A bit dry sound
- Missing some dynamics (compared to the McIntosh).
- Harsh on old recordings

The perfect ballerina. Will she be the perfect partner, or will she be a bit boring after while? Can I afford not to check this out?

Mcintosh 7900:

+ Very good dynamics and depths
+ good for old records - vocals and guitars still sounds good
+/- Contrast between the instruments and the vocals (for instance).
+ Live performance, 1st row, experience!
+ Good with all kind of music
- A bit uncontrolled bass (Actually, this was a bit annoying on some records).
- Soundtage not as good as the Luxman
- A bit harsh in the high tones, maybe, and just maybe..

If Mac was person, I would have dated her, or he wold have become a good friend. Not perfect but very honest and lovely, all tough the looks are a bit scary for a European guy.

Any comments, ideas? I have not concluded which one to get.
 
Well, you notice the Luxman has a switching power supply, that's one clue they are cutting corners. You'll also notice it only meets specs at 8 ohms. You'll notice that they rate the distortion at a 1000 HZ at .005% but its actually 20 db higher at the extremes. Mac rates the MA the full full spectrum. The value of the Luxman in 15 years will be nil compared to the Mac in Dollars. The new thermal tracking transistors in the Macs are a lot faster sounding in some respects. Maybe you should consider a C2500 and the new MC152 to be available this fall. Warmer sound in the highs from the pre-amp and a direct coupled amp for a tighter bass.

That being said when we sold the Luxman product in the 90's we thought it was the best built of the middle class Japanese products. (Yamaha, Denon, Technics, Sony, Sansui, Pioneer etc). The quality of the chassis, though not as great as Pioneer Elite, switches, controls circuit boards were first rate. Heat sinks were on the small size, but attention to detail was high. Sonically they easily out performed the Yamaha units using switching power supplies. But thn they used a conventional power supply. If your speakers have a high enough sensitivity to guarantee 10 db of head room you'll be pretty safe. Remember the amp doesn't have Power guard. Also remember Mac amps will drive below 2 ohms for those difficult panel speakers some people love, or if you wish to drive multiples of speaker pairs.

Uncontrolled bass: Because of the autoformers Mac amps damping factor is around 40 as compared to direct amps that is over 200. So if you want similar bass you have to have speakers that are critically damped is one solution, keep the speakers lines very short and use large guage wire, 12 awg. minimum, will guarantee best performance.

And remember the meters on the Mcintosh are precision guaranteed to perform displays.

I wish you many hours of pleasant listening with your future purchase.
 
I think when one compares McIntosh to a similar high end brand, it usually seems to go about as you describe: when compared head to head, the other brand seems to have more pronounced high end, and while the McIntosh seems "dark" by comparison, there's something very compelling in the mid range and the actual sound of music.

I went through this myself recently with the older-but-new-to-me MA6500 I picked up recently. At first I found myself missing something in the high end compared to the brighter amp that I'd been using. Listening to the McIntosh for long enough, and especially after swapping the older components back, I realized that the McIntosh that had originally sounded "dark" to me was in fact neutral, it was simply playing the music as it was supposed to sound without adding or subtracting anything. Once I got used to this, I much preferred it over the other amp.

The good news is, you probably can't go wrong as I'm sure they both sound incredible (I've never heard the Luxman). An in-home audition would be great. At the end you say both sound good with all types of music, but based on your description I can't help but get the impression the Luxman is the type that sounds the best playing "demo material" and the McIntosh would be better with "music normal folks actually own".

One last thing: ignore anything your local dealers tell you about McIntosh, and how it relates to "more high end comparable to European and Japanese quality" -- If you end up preferring the Luxman fine, but the idea McIntosh takes a back seat to such brands is absurd.
 
Well, you notice the Luxman has a switching power supply, that's one clue they are cutting corners. You'll also notice it only meets specs at 8 ohms. You'll notice that they rate the distortion at a 1000 HZ at .005% but its actually 20 db higher at the extremes. Mac rates the MA the full full spectrum. The value of the Luxman in 15 years will be nil compared to the Mac in Dollars. The new thermal tracking transistors in the Macs are a lot faster sounding in some respects. Maybe you should consider a C2500 and the new MC152 to be available this fall. Warmer sound in the highs from the pre-amp and a direct coupled amp for a tighter bass.

That being said when we sold the Luxman product in the 90's we thought it was the best built of the middle class Japanese products. (Yamaha, Denon, Technics, Sony, Sansui, Pioneer etc). The quality of the chassis, though not as great as Pioneer Elite, switches, controls circuit boards were first rate. Heat sinks were on the small size, but attention to detail was high. Sonically they easily out performed the Yamaha units using switching power supplies. But thn they used a conventional power supply. If your speakers have a high enough sensitivity to guarantee 10 db of head room you'll be pretty safe. Remember the amp doesn't have Power guard. Also remember Mac amps will drive below 2 ohms for those difficult panel speakers some people love, or if you wish to drive multiples of speaker pairs.

Uncontrolled bass: Because of the autoformers Mac amps damping factor is around 40 as compared to direct amps that is over 200. So if you want similar bass you have to have speakers that are critically damped is one solution, keep the speakers lines very short and use large guage wire, 12 awg. minimum, will guarantee best performance.

And remember the meters on the Mcintosh are precision guaranteed to perform displays.

I wish you many hours of pleasant listening with your future purchase.

Twiii, very thank for for useful information. I am planning to use the amplifier on huge panel / ESL speakers that tends to drive below 2 ohms. I also want to have a keeper for several years to come - all good argument to choose the Mcintosh. However, on low / medium volumes i believe the sound signature is the most important criteria for choosing a amplifier.

Some questions:

- What is a switching power supply?
- What do you mean by: "You'll notice that they rate the distortion at a 1000 HZ at .005% but its actually 20 db higher at the extremes"

:)
 
I think when one compares McIntosh to a similar high end brand, it usually seems to go about as you describe: when compared head to head, the other brand seems to have more pronounced high end, and while the McIntosh seems "dark" by comparison, there's something very compelling in the mid range and the actual sound of music.

I went through this myself recently with the older-but-new-to-me MA6500 I picked up recently. At first I found myself missing something in the high end compared to the brighter amp that I'd been using. Listening to the McIntosh for long enough, and especially after swapping the older components back, I realized that the McIntosh that had originally sounded "dark" to me was in fact neutral, it was simply playing the music as it was supposed to sound without adding or subtracting anything. Once I got used to this, I much preferred it over the other amp.

The good news is, you probably can't go wrong as I'm sure they both sound incredible (I've never heard the Luxman). An in-home audition would be great. At the end you say both sound good with all types of music, but based on your description I can't help but get the impression the Luxman is the type that sounds the best playing "demo material" and the McIntosh would be better with "music normal folks actually own".

One last thing: ignore anything your local dealers tell you about McIntosh, and how it relates to "more high end comparable to European and Japanese quality" -- If you end up preferring the Luxman fine, but the idea McIntosh takes a back seat to such brands is absurd.

Thank you! I also believe that Mcintosh, in the end of the day, is a very good day-to-day amplifier - when you just want to listen your favorite music. But, if you have not listened to a Luxman, please do, because the value for money and the sound is just amazing!

Regarding local dealers: I believe they for one is very tired of selling Mcintosh. It is a well known quality product, and they want to sell you something new/else. Furthermore, they have low margins on Mcintosh as well. In addition, they are listening to music all the day - of course they want something special and new from time to time. That said, we - the customers - should choose what work for us. There is a lot of taste and religion in the hi-fi world.

One of the dealers matched a t+a amplifier to ESL - and the match sounded very harsh and not even close to how a ESL should sound in my opinion (which should matter, I have had Quads for 20 years).
 
Last edited:
I think a more direct comparison, at least price wise, would be the Luxman L-507ux to the McIntosh MA-7900. I believe both around the $7500 mark. Believe me, the 507 is a COMPLETELY different animal than the 505 which is at the bottom of the Lux line.

Switching power supply...I think a fact check is in order...this is not to be confused with Switching Amp. It uses a diode to reduce noise in the power supply.

And yes, I own a Luxman, but I LUST after Mac gear for a whole host of reasons. My next amp will most likely be the MA8000 which is what I am saving for. I have done some comparative listening on these amps. More when I get to work...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
...Ok, I can write a little more...

As I stated, the Luxman L-507ux would be the direct model to compare with the MA7900. Get a listen if you can as the 507 is more of everything when compared to the 505 - but it is also twice the price!

I have listened to the L-505ux at a dealer and directly compared it to the L-550ax (an amp you were asking about in the OP) and in addition my good friend Migman (an AK member who may chime in) also owns the 550ax. I have listened to Migman's 550 extensively and it is fantastic.

When directly comparing the 505/550 there really was no comparison. The 550, which is pure class A, was leaps and bounds better to my ears than the 505. Smoother, better bass and had a sweetness that the class A/B Luxman's don't have. The A/B Luxmans however, seem to have more dynamics and even better bass control. Don't let the 20wpc of the 550 scare you off, my friend has run the amp with less than efficient speakers and it roars! This is a non-issue. I think it's more about current delivery than straight up watts-per-channel that make the difference here. My 200wpc 507 with 4 ohm speakers at 10:00 on the volume is deafening and the 550 at 11:00 is deafening.

I have also auditioned, admittedly brief, the McIntosh MA-6700 and MA-7900. They are fantastic. To me, comparisons between the Luxman and McIntosh are kind of fruitless. They both sound great. Most important to me than just comparing specs and features in comparing amps is does the amp I am listening to evoke some sort of emotion in me? Are my feet tapping, head bobbing, eyes closed, smile on my face...the 7900 certainly did that! I did find it very dynamic but I thought the bass was quite nice actually - maybe it was the room acoustics that made it sound bloated in the bass?? Come to think of it, I found the McIntosh bass better than most of the amps I have ever listened to (but I am kind of a bass head). I find the top end a bit better on the Luxman's and on the class A Luxman's the highs are utterly magnificent! Sweet and with plenty of sparkle but never drifts into being annoying.

I don't think you go wrong with either the Luxman or McIntosh integrated amps. It may come down to features/price rather than sound quality between the two. Just make sure you are comparing apples to apples based on prices and models. For example, I am looking to get the MA8000 and I am comparing it to the Luxman L-590ax which is the same price (although the 590 is a class A design). Hope this helps.

J
 
Last edited:
...Ok, I can write a little more...

As I stated, the Luxman L-507ux would be the direct model to compare with the MA7900. Get a listen if you can as the 507 is more of everything when compared to the 505 - but it is also twice the price!

I have listened to the L-505ux at a dealer and directly compared it to the L-550ax (an amp you were asking about in the OP) and in addition my good friend Migman (an AK member who may chime in) also owns the 550ax. I have listened to Migman's 550 extensively and it is fantastic.

When directly comparing the 505/550 there really was no comparison. The 550, which is pure class A, was leaps and bounds better to my ears than the 505. Smoother, better bass and had a sweetness that the class A/B Luxman's don't have. The A/B Luxmans however, seem to have more dynamics and even better bass control. Don't let the 20wpc of the 550 scare you off, my friend has run the amp with less than efficient speakers and it roars! This is a non-issue. I think it's more about current delivery than straight up watts-per-channel that make the difference here. My 200wpc 507 with 4 ohm speakers at 10:00 on the volume is deafening and the 550 at 11:00 is deafening.

I have also auditioned, admittedly brief, the McIntosh MA-6700 and MA-7900. They are fantastic. To me, comparisons between the Luxman and McIntosh are kind of fruitless. They both sound great. Most important to me than just comparing specs and features in comparing amps is does the amp I am listening to evoke some sort of emotion in me? Are my feet tapping, head bobbing, eyes closed, smile on my face...the 7900 certainly did that! I did find it very dynamic but I thought the bass was quite nice actually - maybe it was the room acoustics that made it sound bloated in the bass?? Come to think of it, I found the McIntosh bass better than most of the amps I have ever listened to (but I am kind of a bass head). I find the top end a bit better on the Luxman's and on the class A Luxman's the highs are utterly magnificent! Sweet and with plenty of sparkle but never drifts into being annoying.

I don't think you go wrong with either the Luxman or McIntosh integrated amps. It may come down to features/price rather than sound quality between the two. Just make sure you are comparing apples to apples based on prices and models. For example, I am looking to get the MA8000 and I am comparing it to the Luxman L-590ax which is the same price (although the 590 is a class A design). Hope this helps.

J

Thank you very much for very valuable inputs!!

I believe the choice is between 550ax and MA7900 (due to price & availability - I have a very good offer on the MA7900 compared to the Luxman).

For me this is a tough choice, because I do appreciate very much the highs/details in the Luxman, but even more I appreciate the dynamics in the Mcintosh. What about both :)
 
The total harmonic distortion for the Luxman is. 005 at 1000 HZ and .04% at 20 and 20,000 HZ. Ever time the % distortion changes by a factor of 10 thats 20 db. So if a tube amp has .5 % distortion and a SS amp has .005 distortion the SS state amp has 40 db distortion. Which is a significant change. But its not as significant as an analog recording having 70 db signal to noise versus a Digital recording having 110 db signal to noise where the spectrum of noise and distortion is full range where the distortion of a single tone is very narrow spread over a limited range.

Switching power supply transforms the 60 hz power from the wall up to 50 to 100 KHZ and then to the required DC to power the transistors. Its much cheaper because you don't need the big heavy transformer for big power amps and much more efficient. The only main issue is keeping the High frequencies from the power supply from getting into the audio circuits which can give an irritable quality to the sound. It takes very sophisticated circuits and know how to get a switching power supply right and the audio pure. Denon, Yamaha and other haven't proved to me that they can. Like I say I haven't heard Luxman in a long time, but the rise in HF distortion and lower signal to noise, says there is something going on there that they could improve on. I would pass on Luxman at this time. Now Crown is the leader in US made commercial amps with switching power supplies. They are much more efficient than the type Mac uses and the attention to detail allow Crown to come pretty close to Mac's signal to noise. They haven't conquered the HF distortion, but that usually isn't an issue in large venue sound systems, because the signal to noise is low and Air absorption attenuates the highs enough that our ears can't detect it.

The first time I heard Apogee speakers with a Sony CP-1 CD player and Audio research 150 power amps I had to bail out in less than 30 seconds. It wasn't the amps I had heard them on Acoustat panels and they sounded fine. It was the Sony player and the Apogee panels. If you used a Mac MCD 7005 and either 7300.s or 2300's using the 2 ohm tap the sound was great. Its the ability to get every thing to match up properly that gives good sound.

And as others have said its the great black background of a Mac Quad balanced amp that allows the true character of the sound to present itself with out having a bunch of modulated noise or distortion attaching itself to the signal coloring it with long term listening fatigue being the final result.
 
A major thing to note. McIntosh has the midrange right, they emphasize it as the fundamental area of music. They do well across the spectrum. They don't impress you as much at first, but grow on you over time. McIntosh build quality is heirloom grade, no corners cut in it's design and build. No cheapening in their build. And McIntosh serviced every 20 years will last a lifetime and be able to hand down to family. They are a lifetime investment. They hold their value. And are reliable. And your best long term musical buy. And you can listen to a McIntosh amplifier, preamplifier, or tuner for many hours and want to hear more of it. No listening fatigue.
 
So when you get the 7900, please let is know what you think. Dying for a detailed review!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Switching power supply transforms the 60 hz power from the wall up to 50 to 100 KHZ and then to the required DC to power the transistors. Its much cheaper because you don't need the big heavy transformer for big power amps and much more efficient. The only main issue is keeping the High frequencies from the power supply from getting into the audio circuits which can give an irritable quality to the sound. It takes very sophisticated circuits and know how to get a switching power supply right and the audio pure. Denon, Yamaha and other haven't proved to me that they can. Like I say I haven't heard Luxman in a long time, but the rise in HF distortion and lower signal to noise, says there is something going on there that they could improve on. I would pass on Luxman at this time. Now Crown is the leader in US made commercial amps with switching power supplies. They are much more efficient than the type Mac uses and the attention to detail allow Crown to come pretty close to Mac's signal to noise. They haven't conquered the HF distortion, but that usually isn't an issue in large venue sound systems, because the signal to noise is low and Air absorption attenuates the highs enough that our ears can't detect it.

I don't have any skin in the game, but where are you getting the idea that this amp has a switching power supply? It isn't showing up in any reviews or literature I've found for the Lux.

-D
 
Switching power supply??? As in Class D? I may be dumb, but the Luxman is certainly NOT a Class D amp!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
So when you get the 7900, please let is know what you think. Dying for a detailed review!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Got it! The first impression is good, and is seems like a good match with the Quads ESL.

I will get back to you after a few days of listening.

Thanks for all the good inputs! They have been helpful!
 
The total harmonic distortion for the Luxman is. 005 at 1000 HZ and .04% at 20 and 20,000 HZ. Ever time the % distortion changes by a factor of 10 thats 20 db. So if a tube amp has .5 % distortion and a SS amp has .005 distortion the SS state amp has 40 db distortion. Which is a significant change. But its not as significant as an analog recording having 70 db signal to noise versus a Digital recording having 110 db signal to noise where the spectrum of noise and distortion is full range where the distortion of a single tone is very narrow spread over a limited range.

Switching power supply transforms the 60 hz power from the wall up to 50 to 100 KHZ and then to the required DC to power the transistors. Its much cheaper because you don't need the big heavy transformer for big power amps and much more efficient. The only main issue is keeping the High frequencies from the power supply from getting into the audio circuits which can give an irritable quality to the sound. It takes very sophisticated circuits and know how to get a switching power supply right and the audio pure. Denon, Yamaha and other haven't proved to me that they can. Like I say I haven't heard Luxman in a long time, but the rise in HF distortion and lower signal to noise, says there is something going on there that they could improve on. I would pass on Luxman at this time. Now Crown is the leader in US made commercial amps with switching power supplies. They are much more efficient than the type Mac uses and the attention to detail allow Crown to come pretty close to Mac's signal to noise. They haven't conquered the HF distortion, but that usually isn't an issue in large venue sound systems, because the signal to noise is low and Air absorption attenuates the highs enough that our ears can't detect it.

The first time I heard Apogee speakers with a Sony CP-1 CD player and Audio research 150 power amps I had to bail out in less than 30 seconds. It wasn't the amps I had heard them on Acoustat panels and they sounded fine. It was the Sony player and the Apogee panels. If you used a Mac MCD 7005 and either 7300.s or 2300's using the 2 ohm tap the sound was great. Its the ability to get every thing to match up properly that gives good sound.

And as others have said its the great black background of a Mac Quad balanced amp that allows the true character of the sound to present itself with out having a bunch of modulated noise or distortion attaching itself to the signal coloring it with long term listening fatigue being the final result.

Thansk for the information, very useful to know! I ended up with the 7900 :D
 
So when you get the 7900, please let is know what you think. Dying for a detailed review!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

After a week with the MA 7900 I do have some kind of review, although it is not very detailed yet. I have been trying to be as objective I can be, but keep in mind that I am very impressed by the MA7900 after one week of listening / ownership.

The setting and watts:
With my Quad ESL I think the soundstage is a bit improved than the test (dynamic) speakers in the store/dealer. The bass and lower tones are quite better and more controlled. That said, sometimes I think the bass is a bit too much, but keep in mind that the ESL have never sounded more dynamic/better than this. I will try to use the 8ohms outputs rather than the current 4 ohms to see if this will improve the bass control even more.

The MA 7900 is a beast, and the volume/size of our living room is no match for this amplifier. If you want the option to play loud or to play normal in a big room, the watts do matter.

Regarding full range ESLs, keep in mind that they are hungry for watts and difficult to drive, and the fact that the MA-7900 delivers 200w from 2 to 16 ohms is an advantage. Keeping this in mind, combined with the volume of the room, I did not take my chances with the Luxman 550ax – although the Luxman sound very good. In fact, it was a very hard choice not to pick the Luxman. However, due to some hard priorities regarding the sound, combined with the re-sale value, repair services, build quality and design – the MA 7900 drew the longest straw.

The sound:
Getting back to the actual topic – the soundstage and the sound signature, I have to conform once again how magnificent the dynamics of the Mcintosh amplifier is. Playing John Coltrain, the saxophone is in the middle of the living room. The MA seems to ignore the recording quality/age (although it is remastered). The same goes for Jussi Bjørling, O´Holy night (the best opera singer ever lived, with on of the best songs ever written) – a recording from the mid 50ies. The MA put you right on the first row – 60 years back in time.

Listening to Pink Floyd, Jeff Buckley and Jack Johnson, the guitars in the midrange are very present – it is like somebody re-evented the stereo effect for lack of better words. The very same goes for the vocals – very present, once again like sitting on the first row on a live concert. Listening has become a very different experience after the MA7900 became a family member. I cannot recommend it enough to anyone that are listing to different kind of music. The price is worth it. My old tube amplifier was also nice, but cannot even be compared to the MA.

After this festive speech I have some concerns I wish to share with you:

Concern1 – Soundstage and higher tones: Listing to classic music, for instance Beethoven or Mozart, I do miss the Luxman a bit. On the Mcintosh the soundstage and the musical flow are not as good compared to the Luxman – but of course it is still very good and approved, just not as good as the Luxman. If you are mainly listening to classical music I would have taken the Luxman any day. This music demands fewer watts, so “the lack” of watts is no concern. (I know that several class A amplifiers with 20 watts can drive pretty demanding speakers due to the power supply – The problem for me is that one watt is one watt – (I hold a master degree in engineering – and have a few opinions regarding this subject) – hence, I want the specs to make sure that the ESL can play in a bigger living room.) For higher notes and sounds, I still think the Luxman is a bit better and more silky.

Concern2: Bass control: On the Quads, the bass control is much better/tighter than dynamic loudspeakers in my opinion, but sometimes the bass may be to much and “out” of the soundstage sort of. That said, the speakers have never sounded more dynamic.

Conclusion for sound & soundstage:

1. The MA7900 is superior in depth/dynamics – and is a pure pleasure to listen to high quality music and live recordings. The amplifier is pretty forgiving on low quality records as well. The amplifier really plays to your hearth and not to the analytical left brain. (Don’t get mislead by dealers during demonstrations –
wanting to sell the product they like best themselves, or products with higher margins than for instance Mcintosh (low margin for dealers). The pick of amplifier is highly subjectively, and 90% of all dealers have little or no clue about the specs. They provide you guesses that favor their own brands. )
2. In combination with Quad ESL the sound is very bright and very natural. This will become a very beloved peace of gear, never to be sold I think!
3. This is not the best amplifier on the market if you prefer pure classical music in my opinion. Although the soundstage is very deep, it is not as wide and detailed as the Luxman. The bass also should have been a bit tighter.
4. On the other hand, the Luxman is quite boring on vocals and midrange – and has little dynamics compared to the MA. It is like eating a beef vs. a slice of bred or worse.

The looks – needles to say and to waste some words, just for fun:

Not very high WAF due to size, weight and retro looks – but Mcintosh is like Apple Macintosh. Everybody is trying to copy the looks of these beauties. The build quality is like nothing else you can buy. Hand made and just perfect. It is heavy, so make sure to be two persons to move the amplifier – and reinforce the bookshelf as required.
 
Could your share with us about your setup environment such as room size, speakers position, etc. please?
 
Could your share with us about your setup environment such as room size, speakers position, etc. please?

Yes of course:

- Quad ESL 63 (planned to be replaced due to WAF by Martin Logan Ethos or Monos sooner or later, but only if they sound close to the Quads - TBD). They are placed 1 meter from the wall in order to produce bass and dynamics. They are placed approx. 5 degrees towards the sweet spot.

The living room is approx. 5*12 m2 x 3 meter high. A lot of volume... I would like to have my own music room when I one day move :)

I use the built in DAC, USB to my computer - Audirvana pluss integrated with iTunes.

The cables between the MA and the Quads have a copper core surrounded with silver. They are supposed to be very good (and expensive) - to be honest I never listened too much difference between the cables...

BTW - please feel free to arrest and contradict all my observations and opinions regarding this. I have no pride regarding this subject - only the wish to understand and to optimize the "High end" experience.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom