Mc7100 What say?

G

Guest101

Super Member
The Mc7100 w/o autoformers and only 100wpc@8/ 150wpc@4ohms is one of the cheapest Mac power amps out there. There always seems to be an abundance for sale. Does this amp not satisfy in the long term?

I'm using a '91 C37 preamp and '70 mr77 tuner, but no Mac amp yet. My top 3 amp choices for me are the mc7150, mc150, or mc202 all with autoformers and 150 or 200 wpc, but I can't afford them. What say about the mc7100, or hold out for better amp?
 
Add the MC2125 and MC2155 to your list and keep looking. Keep saving your money and get a 'real' McIntosh amp. Get one with autoformers. Just my opinion.
 
The MC 7100 is one of those in the "slim line" series of Mc products and are less popular with the traditional Mc crowd. While I can't comment on their sound, I think you'd be better off in the long run to stick with one of Mc's autoformer amps. Another consideration might be the MC 754 and although it is not an autoformer unit, is a very nice performing amp that is well built and relatively affordable. It's also 100WPC- same as the 7100 and can drive 4 ohm loads with ease.

**EDIT** The MC 754 is 100 WPC into 8 and 4 ohm- unlike the 7100
 
Last edited:
I had one that I used in stereo then I added 2 for mono double power, and loved them. You will not be dissapointed with the Mc7100.
 
I had one for a while and liked it a lot. I eventually wanted something with meters so I traded it towards an MA6600.

-Matt
 
You mean like MC207, MC205, MC8207, MA6300? The first three all have DPM that allows the amps to deliver full power into 4 or 8 ohms.

Thanks,
Ron-C
 
The future (and the past) of this industry is in multi channel.

Whether the MAC1900 and MA6100 or the MAC4100 and MA6200 most Mac dealers expected fully 1/2 their volume and profits to come out of non autoformer based systems.

While the slim face designs were marketing faiures it was not because of their performance...but all to do with Mac owners ego and perceived value. (big has to be better)
 
Last edited:
Are autoformer amps the best McIntosh amps? In some ways yes but the autoformer has two main drawbacks, first it is big and heavy and second it is expensive. I doubt there is a big market for a 7 channel power amp that weighs 400 lbs. At this point one is better off with a stack of lighter amps.
Past amps like MC752, MC754, MC7200, MC7100 and MC122 are all very good performers and remain very popular in the used market since they take up less space and fit the needs of many. They all retain Power Guard, Sentry Monitor and cosmetics from the other models as well as being engineered and built like a McIntosh.
Cdk is correct that a ton of the various receiver models have been sold over the years and these all were very McIntosh.
The current MA6300 is stereo by the way.

Thanks,
Ron-C
 
The MC7100 is a VERY nice amp. I own a MC7200 which is very symilar with no autoformers. If you can live without the meters, 100wpc is enough juice and the price is right than why not? You will always be able to get out of it about what you have in it. They never last long at the gon or the auction site.

Nothing wrong with that amp imo.

Jim
 
I have an mc7106 that I am using for the home theatre. It also it also does not have auto formers. I like it so much that I am looking for a 7100 to match up with my mx113 for my office. I have an mc2300 for the home stereo so I do get to hear autoformers. Any differences I can hear between the amps is not due to the lack of autoformers.
 
Happy new year to you all!

As we are talking of cheap Mc amps, I own a Mc 502 and also a Mc 2125.

I never tried the 502 on loudspeakers, I only use it with Stax "earspeakers" (as they say) and a Stax transformer (so not an headphone amplifier), but this said I consider that this "little" amp is definitely a real McIntosh product.

It is very much like the 2125 which I used for long with the same Stax headphones system.
 
If it is is a solid-state McIntosh stereo amp and it ain't got autoformers it ain't got no McIntosh "je ne se que". End of story.
 
MX117.MC7150 said:
If it is is a solid-state McIntosh stereo amp and it ain't got autoformers it ain't got no McIntosh "je ne se que". End of story.
Click to expand...

That statement is just plain silly.....McIntosh is integrity of design, which is much more than autoformers, or tubes, or blue meters, even for products that were marketing failures.
 
"Je ne se que" was certainly for the French "Je ne sais quoi" (I don't know what) which could be translated by "that special trick" or "that special feeling".

When I listen to radio throughout my MR78 and Mc502 (and a Stax SR Lambda Pro) I really feel being in the radio studio. And once again, compared to my Mc 2125 with autoformers, I did not found a lot of difference.

I have had my 2125 for years, it has been serviced 3 years ago and it works great. After the recent service I bought the Mc502 for my second system and I was really impressed by this "little" Mc which I did not expect to be that good.

So why wouldn't a more modern Mc7100 be alike or more probably even better?
 
This is an interesting topic, as I have had other non-autoformer Mc amps (Mc2002 and Mc162) to name two. I thought these sounded great and very McIntosh sounding. Even though the Mc2002 did not have autoformers it was built well and sounded great with lots of punch. The Mc2002 has a reputation that is undeserved because it does not have autoformers - but it is a great amp and would recommend it. The Mc162 I once had sounded the same or better than the Mc150 I sold off that had autoformers. Inside the Mc162 it looked a little cheap, but it sounded warm and had enough power, and honestly there was not a lot of difference between it and the Mc150 - even though they were completely different inside.
 
Good point. Since all of these amps use the same parts and similar circuit topography and the output autoformer is a transparent they should have a similar sound quality. This is for comparison to amps of the same vintage of course.
The advantage of the autoformer is increased load flexibility and the absolute elimination of any chance of DC latch-up if the output section fails.

Thanks,
Ron-C
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MORTIS
Attractive C712 seeks physically fit MC202 *long post warning + Porn*
2
Replies
24
Views
6K
MORTIS
MORTIS
SoCal Sam
What Is Your Favorite Vintage Digital Receiver?
3 4 5
Replies
82
Views
13K
MCS Guy
MCS Guy
S
My MA2275 and MCD500 Mini review w/video!
Replies
5
Views
1K
SteveHuff
S
62caddy
McIntosh Production List
Replies
16
Views
6K
Jenkster
Jenkster
K
20 Some Reviews By Ka7niq
Replies
10
Views
13K
300man
300man
Back
Top Bottom