My wish for the next Mcintosh preamp..

audiobliss

AK Subscriber
Subscriber
I am a fairly new Mcintosh convert, but now that I am hooked, this is what I am wishing for the next model to be. Maybe they could call it C49, since I have not seen that number used yet. I currently own a C47 which I really like, but you know its hard to be satisfied in this hobby.

So, it would be great if they would just take the C48, add sub outputs, like two XLR would be nice, with a crossover just for the sub.
Add bluetooth capability for easy streaming.
Add a simple HT bypass switch, they can let the 12v trigger stay if they must.
Upgraded DAC of course, to the latest whatever.
Maybe they could stick a few tubes in the output stage while they are in there, but not really necessary.

Thats it, is that too much to ask ? The 5 band EQ is fine, I don't need 8, too much to fiddle with, and no meters. The ones on the amps are distracting enough.

Let me know when they release it for sale.

AB.
 
Let me explain something

When you want great quality sound less is more, less circuitry = less noise, less filtering = less noise, less switches = less noise. the less you have under the hood = less noise.
 
Don't most subs have built in cutoff circuitry?

You could just run the sub from a pair of preamplifier output jacks - doesn't the C37 have three?
 
Let me explain something

When you want great quality sound less is more, less circuitry = less noise, less filtering = less noise, less switches = less noise. the less you have under the hood = less noise.
:thumbsup:
 
Sounds like you need a C2600 and a MEN 220. C-2600 would give you the tubes, MEN would give you the crossovers and sub output. Using a PC to program the MEN you could program the parametric filters for a given sound balance. The C2600 has the PASS THRU capability when used with a MAC 150/151. If you want 4k you'll need a 160. There are other solutions, too. I would prefer a C-52 and a Klarke tekniq stereo program equalizer myself . I don't like subs, there are always issues unless you have test equipment and expertise to set them up. If you use two subs with sophisticated electronics you really don't need a processor built in your pre-amp. If you need to roll off your main speakers there are line filters you can install between your pre-amp and amp economically. Adding a tube sound can be replicated by using the filters on the C-52. Add a fraction of a DB here and subtract a fraction there and you have tube sound.
 
Let me explain something

When you want great quality sound less is more, less circuitry = less noise, less filtering = less noise, less switches = less noise. the less you have under the hood = less noise.
The C22 has a lot, and I am sure you would drool all over it.
 
Sounds like you need a C2600 and a MEN 220. C-2600 would give you the tubes, MEN would give you the crossovers and sub output. Using a PC to program the MEN you could program the parametric filters for a given sound balance. The C2600 has the PASS THRU capability when used with a MAC 150/151. If you want 4k you'll need a 160. There are other solutions, too. I would prefer a C-52 and a Klarke tekniq stereo program equalizer myself . I don't like subs, there are always issues unless you have test equipment and expertise to set them up. If you use two subs with sophisticated electronics you really don't need a processor built in your pre-amp. If you need to roll off your main speakers there are line filters you can install between your pre-amp and amp economically. Adding a tube sound can be replicated by using the filters on the C-52. Add a fraction of a DB here and subtract a fraction there and you have tube sound.
The tubes are not that necessary, I have a seperate tube system. The other stuff however, would help to reduce the amount of additional boxes you need.
Just like how having a dac in the preamp use to be a nono, but now its so much nicer than adding another box with more cables.
I am using the second set of output on my c47 to drive the sub, and the sub dose have a crossovers, but I am sure a simple electronic one in the preamp would be better.
 
The tubes are not that necessary, I have a seperate tube system. The other stuff however, would help to reduce the amount of additional boxes you need.
Just like how having a dac in the preamp use to be a nono, but now its so much nicer than adding another box with more cables.
I am using the second set of output on my c47 to drive the sub, and the sub dose have a crossovers, but I am sure a simple electronic one in the preamp would be better.

Hmmm...I don't see why moving the crossover from the sub to the preamplifier should necessarily be any better.

Understand the point (and convenience) of less components but on the other side of the coin, there are also advantages of dedicated units due to the inherent limitations & increased complexity that designing everything to fit in a single chassis imposes.

Personally I prefer DACs to be outboard, where they can be serviced/upgraded/replaced independently of the preamplifier, if and when the need arises. In the event the DAC portion needs to be serviced, you're out of your preamplifier and your entire system is down until you get it back.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm...I don't see why moving the crossover from the sub to the preamplifier should necessarily be any better.

Understand the point (and convenience) of less components but on the other side of the coin, there are also advantages of dedicated units due to the inherent limitations & increased complexity that designing everything to fit in a single chassis imposes.

Personally I prefer DACs to be outboard, where they can be serviced/upgraded/replaced independently of the preamplifier, if and when the need arises. In the event the DAC portion needs to be serviced, you're out of your preamplifier and your entire system is down until you get it back.
 
Hmmm...I don't see why moving the crossover from the sub to the preamplifier should necessarily be any better.

Understand the point (and convenience) of less components but on the other side of the coin, there are also advantages of dedicated units due to the inherent limitations & increased complexity that designing everything to fit in a single chassis imposes.

Personally I prefer DACs to be outboard, where they can be serviced/upgraded/replaced independently of the preamplifier, if and when the need arises. In the event the DAC portion needs to be serviced, you're out of your preamplifier and your entire system is down until you get it back.
Yeah, I agree , I have been a seperates type for all my years also. Must be just getting old with that downsizing mode kicking in.
Maybe I Will just end up with one big intergrated amp eventually , getting to lazy to even put on a LP, just want to stream.
 
Yeah, I agree , I have been a seperates type for all my years also. Must be just getting old with that downsizing mode kicking in.
Maybe I Will just end up with one big intergrated amp eventually , getting to lazy to even put on a LP, just want to stream.
This is what I'v been thinking about to down size, and now they are building more smaller size components to go with it.
Mcintosh MHA100
http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/us/Products/pages/ProductDetails.aspx?CatId=newproducts&ProductId=MHA100


imgres-1.jpg imgres.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom