Brian
An Old Geezer
The setup was in a test environment but the room was not ideal. A little live for me. The MC3500s are a magic amp. It sems McIntosh's smallest tube amp and largest are the only Mc vintage tube amps that have what it takes for me.
They were at idle for most of the session, just more power than the Tannoys would use with out being destroyed or at least driven into a very high distortion level. I could find nothing to fault in any way. Just to repeat -NOTHING. The preamp was from Quebec. I can not remember the name but a limited production unit made by a guy who was in the computer engineering field or something like that. He made both a preamp and power amp. I wanted to hear the power amp but it was not available. Oh, both are also tube units. With the top off, it was the first preamp since seeing my first Marantz 7 that caused my jaw to drop. Others who saw it had the same question. Can you order it with a plexiglas case. The tt was a Thorens TD126 with a SME. I can not remember the cartridge.
We then subbed in the ARC D76a sets in strapped mode as they'd come close power wise to the MC3500. Well, 3db less but close enough as we could not come near using all that power anyway. The difference in sound was all amp related. The ARC signature is closer to say a Marantz 8 or 9 than any McIntosh. More air, detail, somewhat thinner, less authority, somewhat faster in delivery with less aggressiveness. The violins, something that I tend to notice were more realistic, maintained more of a sense of individuality ut not to the point of sounding like indivduals doing their own thing. The MC3500 lost some of the individuality and the violin soundstage collapsed somewhat, actually to a more realistic size than with the ARC. We then unstrapped one of the ARCs and just used it as a stereo 75 watter. Not much of a difference except in the bass. I've always found the bass when running the ARCs unstrapped as lacking in impact. Not the impact that is generally false with many amp/speaker combos. They had been scoped and were almost ruler straight to 10hz so it was not an amp issue per se. It just seemed with all the speakers I used the ARCs with the bass just did not come into where it should unless I strapped them. Running the same speakers with other amps did not exhibit this so it was something related to the ARCs. Lest it seem I'm panning the ARCs, they were really good amps. The bass was there but seemed to move to a less predominant position in the music than it should.
I would have loved to have kept the Churchills to try out for a longer period but the owner could not be convinced. He did offer to throw another cocktail listening party if I wanted to bring over my Symphonys and put them up against each other but from listening for the time I did, I know the Symphonys would slink home with their crossovers between their tails. The Tannoys were just out of the Bozak's class. Yes, I was humbled. If I had to put a % of how close the Bozaks would come, I'd venture to say maybe 70%. Yes, that much of a difference. In defense of the Bozaks, they cost me less than probably the shipping crates of the Churchills.
They were at idle for most of the session, just more power than the Tannoys would use with out being destroyed or at least driven into a very high distortion level. I could find nothing to fault in any way. Just to repeat -NOTHING. The preamp was from Quebec. I can not remember the name but a limited production unit made by a guy who was in the computer engineering field or something like that. He made both a preamp and power amp. I wanted to hear the power amp but it was not available. Oh, both are also tube units. With the top off, it was the first preamp since seeing my first Marantz 7 that caused my jaw to drop. Others who saw it had the same question. Can you order it with a plexiglas case. The tt was a Thorens TD126 with a SME. I can not remember the cartridge.
We then subbed in the ARC D76a sets in strapped mode as they'd come close power wise to the MC3500. Well, 3db less but close enough as we could not come near using all that power anyway. The difference in sound was all amp related. The ARC signature is closer to say a Marantz 8 or 9 than any McIntosh. More air, detail, somewhat thinner, less authority, somewhat faster in delivery with less aggressiveness. The violins, something that I tend to notice were more realistic, maintained more of a sense of individuality ut not to the point of sounding like indivduals doing their own thing. The MC3500 lost some of the individuality and the violin soundstage collapsed somewhat, actually to a more realistic size than with the ARC. We then unstrapped one of the ARCs and just used it as a stereo 75 watter. Not much of a difference except in the bass. I've always found the bass when running the ARCs unstrapped as lacking in impact. Not the impact that is generally false with many amp/speaker combos. They had been scoped and were almost ruler straight to 10hz so it was not an amp issue per se. It just seemed with all the speakers I used the ARCs with the bass just did not come into where it should unless I strapped them. Running the same speakers with other amps did not exhibit this so it was something related to the ARCs. Lest it seem I'm panning the ARCs, they were really good amps. The bass was there but seemed to move to a less predominant position in the music than it should.
I would have loved to have kept the Churchills to try out for a longer period but the owner could not be convinced. He did offer to throw another cocktail listening party if I wanted to bring over my Symphonys and put them up against each other but from listening for the time I did, I know the Symphonys would slink home with their crossovers between their tails. The Tannoys were just out of the Bozak's class. Yes, I was humbled. If I had to put a % of how close the Bozaks would come, I'd venture to say maybe 70%. Yes, that much of a difference. In defense of the Bozaks, they cost me less than probably the shipping crates of the Churchills.
