• Please note that Audiokarma will be offline briefly for updates early on Monday morning, September 28th.

‘Vintage’ Mcintosh SS amp to go with C29 preamp and AR3 speakers

C

Cropper

New Member
Hi all,

I recently purchased a C29 preamp and so find myself able to venture into the McIntosh section of audiokarma for the first time looking for a bit of advice.

Having recently restored a pair of AR3 speakers I now have a second room set up of a Thorens TD160mkii table, Topping D90 DAC, Mcintosh C29 preamp, Bryson 4ST amp and AR3 speakers.

While there is nothing wrong with the Bryston amp, I have a third room I can use it in, have the itch and really want to match the C29 with an older McIntosh MC amp and so was hoping people could help me out please.

I think I want 200wpc or more (I’m sure I’ll sell the AR3 eventually), would like it to look similar to the C29, have the meters, and so researched and have seen the following out there:

- MC2205
- MC2255
- MC7270
- MC7200
- MC7300

I had kinda ruled out the 2500 and 2600 due to style and price, but happy to get opinions on these (and others I may have missed).

Reason I ask for opinions on people’s preferences is that I noticed that despite variances in manufacturing year and original sale price of the above models, all have examples of sales between 2-3k in the last few months. Not to say that they don’t sell for more, they do, but if you get lucky, they all can be obtained for roughly the same price.

Common sense therefore tells me to wait for a newer MC7xxx, but I’m happy working on things and I’d be interested to get sonic opinions as well as practical ones. For example I believe not all these are autoformers.

I’ve got Marantz 23xx and 22xx receivers in other rooms and an ARC SP8 preamp, so I’m not scared of a warm sound, in fact that is probably my aim in this particular room. I would like it to compliment the AR3s and C29 if I’m lucky enough to find someone who’s heard all.

Thanks in advance for help
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
Not on your list, but my 2105 pushes my AR3a's beautifully. Rated at 105 watts, benched 140-150. Don't use anything close to that, and you won't either for your 3's.

2105.jpg
 
Thanks for the super quick responses guys, very interesting also

I read a few other threads on here where people had a debate on 2155 vs 2205 for example. Again, head tells me that you both make a good point, perhaps no need to limit based on power, and the 2155 is newer than some I listed which should be a good thing.

Although I did try restored pioneer and marantz monster receivers on the AR3s and I felt like the Bryston was an improvement - of course lots of reasons outside of just watts possible for that improvement.

I also don’t think any of the ones I listed, or the ones you guys added, will be a let down either. I was just intrigued by the prices. The 2155 does seem to be $500 or so cheaper than some but not all of the ones I listed, so if watts are the main difference I think it’s worth considering. I’ll look at the 2105 too as unlike the 2155 I hadn’t really looked at that too much
 
Last edited:
If you have the space a 7200 with a high damping factor and over 500 watt peak out put at 4 ohms. But remember your AR-3's were originally rated at 35 watts RMS with tube amps. So figuring 6 db peaks for pop music that 140 watts. So you would be better with the little 7100. As I remember it puts out in the high 200's in the 4 ohm in peaks. The other amps will sound to mushy because of their low damping factor. More tube like.


We used to demo 3 AR-3s connected to a 275. Yes there was a mis match. We drove each AR off the 8 ohm tap with the center getting the sum of the left and right by wiring the left and right channels in series using the 4 ohm taps. . Davie preferred we wired the right speaker with the polarity reversed and then compensated by throwing the phase switch on the pre-amp to restore the polarity making the center channel out of phase meaning rather than producing the sum of the left and right channels the center produced only the difference or the ambient signal only of the L&R channels. I preferred using 3 Cornwalls with Davies hook up. 16 db more dynamic range and no impedance mismatches. It also worked with three Bozaks of any size with 9 db more efficiency. Paul Klipsch center hook up produced the sum to focus everything more to the center and to dry. out or make the sound more in your face. I still prefer 3.0 for stereo. I use the Paul Klipsch hook up when not using the system in the HT mode. But I do all the trickery at line between the Pre amps and electronic crossovers using balanced connections and an isolation transformer.
 
Last edited:
twiiii said:
If you have the space a 7200 with a high damping factor and over 500 watt peak out put at 4 ohms. But remember your AR-3's were originally rated at 35 watts RMS with tube amps. So figuring 6 db peaks for pop music that 140 watts. So you would be better with the little 7100. As I remember it puts out in the high 200's in the 4 ohm in peaks. The other amps will sound to mushy because of their low damping factor. More tube like. We used to demo 3 AR-3s connected to a 275. Yes there was a mis match. We drove each AR off the 8 ohm tap with the center getting the sum of the left and right by wiring the left and right channels in series using the 4 ohm taps. . Davie preferred we wired the right speaker with the polarity reversed and then compensated by throwing the phase switch on the pre-amp to restore the polarity making the center channel out of phase meaning rather than producing the sum of the left and right channels the center produced only the difference or the ambient signal only of the L&R channels. Paul Klipsch center hook up produced the sum to focus everything more to the center and to dry. out or make the sound more in your face. I still prefer 3.0 for stereo. I use the Paul Klipsch hook up when not using the system in the HT mode.
Click to expand...

Would the 7150 work as well, rather than the 7100? Just checking as the 7100 doesn’t have the meters

I do have space for the 7200 and am tempted by it as the prices are v reasonable for the 7200 compared to the older amps - guess it’s not as collectible yet...


Thanks
 
Cropper said:
Would the 7150 work as well, rather than the 7100? Just checking as the 7100 doesn’t have the meters

I do have space for the 7200 and am tempted by it as the prices are v reasonable for the 7200 compared to the older amps - guess it’s not as collectible yet...


Thanks
Click to expand...
twiiii dislikes McIntosh power amps with autoformers. So take that with a grain of salt.

Last MC7200 owner I spoke with was glad to be rid of it. So, there is no one amp perfect for all tastes.

You have a nice list. I've owned half of them, still do have an MC7300. IMHO, the MC7270 is the best value in used McIntosh SS amps.
 
I agree with the MC7270, a good amp for the money. The 7300 was the re-design, mostly with much more headroom for the then emerging digital media that required it, also a great amp for the money.

If you find a 2205 in good condition / serviced, that was an iconic amp for me, breaking the 200wpc barrier it could drive Maggies and other harder to drive speakers. They sold a ton of them so there's a lot of information out there on keeping them running, and the constant supply keeps prices sane (for McIntosh anyway). The 2255 is a step up in power, and I really like the sound, but its relative rarity makes it much harder to find one in good condition for fair money. Its smaller sibling the 2155 much easier to find and for your current speakers plenty of power.

If I've learned only one thing through my decades of audiophyllic hobbies however, it is that more power is never a bad thing (in good quality gear). I have in the past few years decided to collect a few nice tube amplifiers, and run into my '70s problem where the power is only marginal for a set of speakers that interests me. I have owned planar, electrostatic, conventional, many large and small speaker sets over the years and it is frustrating to look at a pair of speakers and know that if I buy them I will not have the power to properly drive them (dynamics considered), and need to pass. Even more frustrating to buy those speakers and find that I can't use my favorite amplifier with them, I need to use a less-liked more powerful amp or buy a new one. For this reason I try to make the point that for any of us still in a journey of discovery, experimentation, buying and trying look for the most powerful version of whatever you're considering, that's within your budget. To buy an amp at this point rated for 3x-4x your current needs is not a bad choice provided you're happy with the sound of that amp.

Rambling on (as I tend to do), I will say that I was fine with the sound of a couple of my Pioneer "monster" receivers for the most part, and one of their amplifiers. This when they were new, and currently. marantz OTOH, I did not like when they were new, and as I collected about a half-dozen excellent examples a few years ago (fully restored, not recapped or serviced), I still don't like their mediocre sound. McIntosh however, I've not owned a bad sounding Mc amplifier, which is why at this point I have purged all of my marantz and Pioneer collection, kept most of my McIntosh (and one Sansui, but that's a different story). The 2505 & 2105 are the first SS offerings, people call them "tube-like" and I have to agree that they have a certain sound signature that makes them a little more like tubes, but not like tubes. The next generation 2205 is a little quicker, more detail IMO, 2255 more still, and you can keep going on to the next 5 generations of Mc solid-state amp and continue to find improvements. The good news is that you can buy a 2205 today, and provided you get a good one and don't overpay, there's a very good chance that you'll be able to get your money back out in the future should you choose to upgrade.

So my suggestion? Look for a nice 2205, maybe 2105 if really nice and serviced, enjoy it with your current speakers. OR: move up into the newest amp you can afford, keep that for a while as you upgrade other components (if? yeah right) and maybe you'll upgrade it some day, maybe not. Don't over think it, pretty much like going into an excellent restaurant and everything on the menu looks good, just order one and you'll be happy.
 
damacman said:
twiiii dislikes McIntosh power amps with autoformers. So take that with a grain of salt.

Last MC7200 owner I spoke with was glad to be rid of it. So, there is no one amp perfect for all tastes.

You have a nice list. I've owned half of them, still do have an MC7300. IMHO, the MC7270 is the best value in used McIntosh SS amps.
Click to expand...

True he does ramble on a bit, and has some strongly expressed opinions, but he has many times told of his satisfaction of commercial installations of the (autoformer) 2250 so, ...

Damping factor is a whole different discussion, too much is too much, not enough also not enough, but any amplifier driving multiple drivers in a 2-way / 3-way etc. system is working in compromises so pick your poison.
 
Thanks @SaturationPt , very helpful!

I’m with you 100% on the power part, and I probably should’ve been clearer in my original post that while I am very much enjoying the AR3s, I’m not sure I love them as much as what people are willing to pay for them and what other speakers I could buy for that money. In my other room I have Kappa 8.1 speakers and I’ve always wanted to head further up the infinity ladder and if I did - I’d need more power.

So I’m still thinking that 200+wpc would be more future-proof given that I’m unlikely to stop collecting any time soon and I’m with you - nothing worse than not having enough power to drive something you have or would like. It’s the reason I now have spare receivers and lower powers amps...


On audioclassics today there’s a $1000 increase between the 2155 and the 2205, and a $700 increase between the 7200 and the 2205. Interestingly, the 7300 is same price as the 2205. None come with the cabinets, which pains me a little.

I guess my question is, and it’s not for me to argue with audioclassics, putting collectibility aside for just a moment, is the 2205 as good an amp as the 20 years newer and more powerful 7300? Is it $700 better than the newer and same powered 7200? These are all B1 rated on their site, original spec performance. I suspect the answer is they’re just different?

I guess the 2205 is more vintage and ‘cooler’...
 
I believe that the MC7200 is a direct-coupled amp not an autoformer amp, which is likely the reason it sells for considerably less. The 2205 is cool, and has powerguard as well as autoformers, but personally I'd take the 7270 or 7300 over the 2205. MC2155 vs MC2205? Tougher call, the 2155 is a generation newer and has the cool countdown test, but has less power. If you are comparing 2205 and 2255 it is easy for me, and as much as I like the 2205's vintage-cool, I think I'd go newer and more power (with autoformers) in pretty much any case here.
 
I drive Vandersteen 2Ce speakers with an MC2150, and the power on reserve (190 wpc as tested on the bench) is more than enough for any volume I want to experience. I can highly recommend that series of amps: MC2155/2150/2255/2250.
 
cnolanh said:
I drive Vandersteen 2Ce speakers with an MC2150, and the power on reserve (190 wpc as tested on the bench) is more than enough for any volume I want to experience. I can highly recommend that series of amps: MC2155/2150/2255/2250.
Click to expand...

It is the last of the chrome-chassis amps from that era, for this reason they should continue to climb in value. If I could only keep two amplifiers I would keep my MC2255 and my MC75s (well, that's three but I consider the 75s to be a stereo amp).

The 452 is another good value IMO in a used amp, but at twice the price.
 
You guys have been extremely helpful but boy I’m finding this decision tough - I think it’s the $ factor tbh. Sounds silly but I’ve bought receivers and adcoms and audires etc just to try them out, but when it comes to battling out 4 or 5 $2-3k amps that are all good but different pros and cons (era, style, designer, age, Collectability, watts) I really want to get it ‘right’
 
Post your location and there might be someone near you who will let you audition, much smaller "might" with the covid thing.

I believe that this won't be your last McIntosh amp so keep that in mind, buy one that is in very good condition so that it will be easier to sell should you decide to do so.

I'm reminded of a friend who chose a 50' SeaRay for his first boat. He explained that everyone he met had been through several boats to get to their 50, so he figured he'd just start with the one he'd eventually be happy with.

It was almost two years before he bought a 72, ...

Get what works, you'll move on eventually anyway.
 
In terms of acoustic output, an MC2205 will only provide an extra <1 dB of output over an MC2155; and MC2255 might be good for another 1 dB over that, neither of which is significant.

We're not talking anywhere the difference in values the raw "wattage" figures might suggest. Any of these models will be perfectly capable for powering almost any speaker it's likely to be paired with. The MC2155/2255 can also drive impedances down to 2 ohm (1 ohm in mono mode).

Could always add another to the system with each being run in mono mode for double output power capability if the need ever arises down the road. A pair of MC2155 for example would provide a realistic ~ 400 watts per channel. Given the wide range of load impedances they can handle plus parallel capability, there should be little to worry about being "future proof."

I also concur with @SaturationPt these chrome chassis units will always have strong collector interest and are as solid McIntosh amplifiers as any.

No need to overthink this.
 
Last edited:
Thanks all - I get it, great points, really helpful. I think I will go with the chrome chassis for now, for lots of reasons, but partly for the collectability/resale value and style. I don't think I am missing out by not getting a MC7xxx for now. I'll just make sure the chrome chassis model I go for is clean and up to spec to your point. Besides, two 2155 could almost be bought for the price of one 7300 and who wouldn't want two amplifiers instead of one anyway...

Thanks again,
 
Also there was the mc2125 just down a little power than 2155. Also the 2125 and 2155 are smaller in size and weight than 2105, 2205 which is a good thing as one gets older.
 
Chrome chassis ended with the MC-2255 for sorta modern gear, in all, most don't care about the chrome chassis; they're looking for the full glass face. This amplifier has a cult following, (I know: I've got 2) so can be both expensive and rare. The '7270 is nearly the same amplifier, improved a bit, but very similar - so more available and a generation newer.
Search this forum for comments written on it, you'll find enough to keep busy until Independence Day next year.

Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom