MC452 VS MA9000

[Torsteinrs]

Hi,
I currently have NAD m12 (dac/pre) and NAD m22 (power) with my B&W 802DIA speakers.

I wonder what you guys think, shuld i sell my power amps and get the MC452 and use it with my current NAD DAC/PRE or sell it all and get the new MA9000?
My budget is already stretched. So if i go for the MC452 it is not a possibility to also get a new pre. At least for a long while.

I see that the MC452 is about 6 years old. When do you think a new model will arive?

Best regards
Torstein

 

[louisjames]

From the posts here the 452 is the cats pajamas and on a lot of people's wish list. Owners will certainly chime in as to the beauty and "incredibleness" this puts out. And nothing wrong with building your system piece by piece. The 9000 certainly looks impressive and the 8-band EQ is a very nice to have. But personally I'd rather have the power that the 452 puts out as opposed to the 300-watts per channel of the 9000. In any event this is a good quandry to have and I know it's certainly one I'd like to be "faced with." Good luck! Just my 2c's YMMV.

 

[62caddy]

MA9000 will be significantly more expensive than the MC452. In terms of acoustic output advantage, the difference between 300W and 450W is 1.76 dB which isn't very significant.

All depends on your long range intentions. If you're looking for flexibility for future upgrades, MC452 might be the better route without being wedded to the preamp/DAC sections of the MA9000.

 

[joeinid]

If you are relatively happy with the M12 pre/dac, you can stick with it and go for the MC452. It really is a superb amp and when you get the itch in the future, upgrade the pre to something McIntosh. I think you'll be happier in the long run. I'd opt for a tube McIntosh preamp with a replaceable dac module, hoping the preamps will be updated to use the new module. The MC452 will be a lifetime purchase so that's my first choice.

 

[62caddy]

@Torsteinrs...Welcome to AK.

 

[Torsteinrs]

Thanks for all the feedback!

Beside the 150 extra watts is there a sonic diffrence? I see that the MC452 is quad balanced and the MA9000 not.

 

[louisjames]

I doubt you'd hear the difference sound-quality-wise, although having extra power is never a bad thing and "can" add some "heft" to the soundstage. Both are massively great units. But I would go quad balanced for future proofing as it's a very nice to have.

 

[62caddy]

Thanks for all the feedback!

Beside the 150 extra watts is there a sonic diffrence? I see that the MC452 is quad balanced and the MA9000 not.

Quad balanced is an engineering refinement that helps to reduce noise. Quad design is only used in upper tier McIntosh products. While reduced noise is never a bad thing, it's important to remember the final result is only as good as the noise level contained in the original recording, so the benefit is relative.

Chances are either unit handily exceeds the noise floor present in the vast majority of source material.

 

[chef free]

If I could only have one, I'd pick the MA9000 without any hesitation.
How could I live without a Mac pre?!? That's a huge part of the overall McIntosh sound.
300 watts is enough for most speakers and the eight band tone control, out of the circuit at "flat", is the icing on the cake.
Oh sure, the quad balanced MC452 is a better amp, but without a McIntosh pre-amp, I doubt that you would notice.

 

[Mamrak1]

You have said your budget is stretched. A new MA9000 is at least $10,500 US. The MC452 will be considerable less. An MC452 would last you a lifetime. Only you know what your finances will allow.

 

[Wvnyc@Ct]

As others have said, I would get a 452 and anchor your system around it. It sounds amazing and will be a lifetime purchase.

 

[louisjames]

And if you get the 452 used from Audio Classics whose B1's are like new you'll save a bundle. Of course there are other dealers as well but used McIntosh is your friend provided you get it from a reputable source.

 

[Stereognat]

If I could only have one, I'd pick the MA9000 without any hesitation.

Agreed, MA9000 without a ****ing doubt. For the people that don't know, the MA9000 is quad balanced. Having owned 5 and demoed over 20 McIntosh models (MC225, MC240, MC275, MC30, MC40, MC60, MC75, MC2500, MC2505), MC7300, MC275 VI, MC75 60th anniversary, MC601, MC2KW, MA6900, C38, C1100, D100, D150, D1100, etc), the MA9000 impressed me the most.

For the DAC section, I wouldn't be worried at all; especially if the music you listen to is FLAC, WAV, etc.

"The DA1 can be easily replaced by future modules to keep your MA9000 up to date as new digital audio formats and technologies are developed."

"The DA1 utilizes a powerful 8-channel, 32-bit Digital-to-Analog Converter (DAC) used in Quad Balanced mode. The coax and optical inputs will decode music up to 24-bit/192kHz for high resolution audio playback; the USB input accepts even higher PCM signals up to 32-bit/384kHz and supports up to DSD256 and DXD 384kHz."

Just recently, McIntosh was honored to receive the Stereo Sound 2017 Grand Prix Award for the MA9000 Integrated Amplifier. Stereo Sound's Grand Prix Award has been recognized to be the most prestigious award for high-end audio products in Japan - and indeed the world. Selection criteria includes not only excellent sound quality but also product originality, innovation, fit and finish, reliability and safety among others. All selections are based on Stereo Sound's founding principle that "Audio products are not sufficient by only sounding good, it must also be comprehensively superior." These awards serve as a testament to McIntosh's longstanding engineering principles.

I called McIntosh and had Jordan reach out to the engineer. Jordan says that the MA9000 is quad balanced only in the DAC/Pre section because there are four DACs per channel; however, the reason why the amplifier section isn't quad balanced is because larger amplifiers (i.e., the MC452) tend to get noisier, and the engineer didn't feel it was necessary to use that in the MA9000 as it didn't need it.

 

[TimmehTan]

Thanks for all the feedback!

Beside the 150 extra watts is there a sonic diffrence? I see that the MC452 is quad balanced and the MA9000 not.

MA9000 is quad balanced and imo is wayy better. I'm also not a separates guy . And my choice would be the MA9000 as I'm currently saving money to upgrade mine.

 

[MACKIE1975]

I'm currently saving money to upgrade mine.

Put it on payment plan

 

[joeinid]

MA9000 is quad balanced and imo is wayy better. I'm also not a separates guy . And my choice would be the MA9000 as I'm currently saving money to upgrade mine.

I can not find that the MA9000 is "quad balanced" on the McIntosh website or in the owners manual. Can you help me find it?

It looks like the DAC is quad balanced, but not the amp section of the MA9000.

 

[ClaytonD]

Quad balanced is an engineering refinement that helps to reduce noise. Quad design is only used in upper tier McIntosh products. While reduced noise is never a bad thing, it's important to remember the final result is only as good as the noise level contained in the original recording, so the benefit is relative.

Chances are either unit handily exceeds the noise floor present in the vast majority of source material.

The DAC/Pre is quad balanced, so that makes it quad balanced capable. From all the latest and greatest MAC, I'd choose the MA9000 and not think twice. I'm not sure why anyone would think an MC452 "sounds better" because it doesn't.

 

[eiraved]

I'm not sure why anyone would think an MC452 "sounds better" because it doesn't.

Oh, you tryin' to start trouble? Yeah I know it's your opinion, but do you have to smash the cake in our face?

 

[Mike Gibson]

This is the McIntosh Forum not the place for some juvenile crapfest. If you two don't knock this off you'll be on the outside looking in. Only warning.