• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

dynaco st 35 vs mcintosh mc30

Alberto86

Alberto86

Active Member
Hello all.

I was wondering if anybody compared the dynaco st 35 vs mcintosh mc30.

I run a pair of klipschorn with a new built dynakit st35 from dynakitparts and it works great, particularly after I added Telefunken pre tubes.

I’m curious to know if anybody did that comparison because I read many good comments about the mc30 and I was thinking to get a pair to replace the st35.

Obviously it’s not about quality price I’m after.

Any comment is welcomed.

Best

AB
 
Register to hide this ad
Hmm, I've never heard of anyone suggesting either ST35 or ST70 was on par with MC30, which is hardly surprising given the relative prices, but then I haven't heard either.
 
A blind comparison of them on equal footing could be interesting.
I admit to having a thing for the old McIntosh amps, but the utter direct elegance of the Laurent driver circuit in the Dyna amps has an appeal of effective simplicity vs complexity.
 
Thanks pio.
Indeed it’s very hard to find anybody that did any sort of comparison between the 2.

The st35 is a little amp but it really push my klipschorn. Brilliant.
 
Some consider the ST-35 best of class, ever, tho it's probably an honest 12 Watts per channel. 17 Watt rating per channel is really pushing things afaik.
 
FWIW, the McIntosh MC225 would be my Mac choice for your setup. Alternatively, a Marantz model 8 /8B. The 225 was Mac's simplest entry level unity coupled amp, the Marantz simpler still. The Dyna amps elegantly simple. They all have their virtues, but many consider the 225 the best sounding Mac tube amp, and the Marantz it's rival.
Mind that either is much more costly than a sorted out Dyna Stereo 70, regardless of any sonic differences (sez the guy with a Marantz).
 
Last edited:
With an EFB board an ST-35 will do an honest 17 watts per channel. Stock its closer to 13 with both driven. Its more a limitation in the bias system design than the amp being grossly over-rated. In stock form it will actually do ~17 a channel but only with one channel driven.

http://www.tronola.com/html/a_new_look.html

Power-wise the ST-70 is a more fair comparison to an MC-30. Completely different design though so thats about where the comparison ends. Having never heard either one, I can offer no thoughts on what that means exactly.
 
It's been a while, and I no longer have the Altec 846B's (Valencias) I used for the test, but I found the McIntosh MC30's best overall, with the ST35 a close second. The ST70, while very good, had more a "tubey" thick sound than the other two. The MC30's midrange was spooky real, and the bass was tight and clean. Again, the ST35's mids were better than the ST70, but not quite up to the level of the MC30's. Bass was not as solid, either. All amps were refurbished (caps replaced, r's checked, voltages correct, NOS tubes,etc). All were driven from a recently refurbished McIntosh C22 preamp. Not a typical setup with the Dyna's, but I wanted to keep the variables just to the amps. Not scientific, my opinions, YMMV, have a happy day.

jD
 
gadget73 said:
With an EFB board an ST-35 will do an honest 17 watts per channel. Stock its closer to 13 with both driven. Its more a limitation in the bias system design than the amp being grossly over-rated. In stock form it will actually do ~17 a channel but only with one channel driven.

http://www.tronola.com/html/a_new_look.html

Power-wise the ST-70 is a more fair comparison to an MC-30. Completely different design though so thats about where the comparison ends. Having never heard either one, I can offer no thoughts on what that means exactly.
Click to expand...


Hi there.

Thanks for your answer.

On my st35 I upgraded the bias control adding a board that allow to bias each single EL84 so that I can use unmatched tubes. Otherwise yes it’s a bit frustrating (and. Expensive) trying to get quads of matched nos tubes. I’m using at the moment a quad of OTK nos Russian tubes biased quite warm and it’s sound very nice.

Cheers
 
That really only gets it done at idle. Once you put signal to it, unmatched tubes are still unmatched tubes. Best performance will always be with a matched quad in one of these but individual adjustments do allow less than perfectly matched tubes to be run. Jim McShane can hook you up with a well matched quad of a new production tube of your liking for a reasonable price. The Sovtek EL84M is effectively the same as the old Soviet tube. I've run the Commie tubes and the ones I've had were all over the map in terms of how they matched up most of the time. I have probably a dozen and I don't think I could put together a matched quad out of all of them. I might be able to come up with several pairs though.

The EFB setup can be paired with the individual adjustments, but basically it takes the place of the cathode resistor.
 
Pio1980 said:
The Stereo 70 would be more comparable powerwise, especially with upgraded power supply.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting idea. I've had both in the past but not at the same time. I've got both now but neither operating. FWIW, I don't think a stock circuit ST70 will match the MC30s in bass control. With a modified power supply though they might come close but I'd bet still no cigar. One thing the MC30s always grabbed me with was their authority on the speaker within its power limits. The other thing was how smooth and clean they were, something I never really think of re: a stock ST70. Again, a new front-end could likely dramatically change that.
 
Interesting. These 2 amps are in completely different leagues. The McIntosh MC30 I have gave me an honest 35 watts into my dummy load on all original parts, over 60 years after it was built. It has not had an easy life. It is covered in rust and Krylon. The SCA 35 which I have didn't fair so well. It was built by a novice, and aged very poorly. I have sunk quite a few dollars into bringing it back to life and it still isn't finished. When it is finished it's going bye bye. The McIntosh is staying with me. I value quality of sound but also quality of construction, and the MC30 is the polar opposite of the whole dynaco lineup. That's my opinion, and I would never represent it as anything besides opinion, and opinions are like....
 
gadget73 said:
well, you're comparing a Timex to a Rolex here. They were never meant to play in the same league.
Click to expand...
Ref'ing Dave Gillespie's thread on baseline testing the Stereo 70 makes me wonder how one would do at one of DOB's Mac clinic with fresh tubes and solid state rectification. I recall a statement that only the Marantz tube amps regularly met spec, along with the Macs (freshened up from Dave's tube stash).
 
Have owned examples of both timekeepers, the one thing I disliked intensely about Timex was the plated slush metal casework. The reason the mechanics worked so well was excellent materials and superb QC.
Rolex was, like McIntosh, a standard of excellence on construction and performance in context of their time of supremacy. Rolex offered the only durable reliable chornometer accurate personal timepiece for some time from the 1930s to the 1970s, McIntosh the first and best laboratory grade tube amplifier in the late 1940s thru the early 1970s. The advent of silicon solid state in both instances eventually rendered them both functionally comparatively irrelevant.
Rolls-Royce will likewise remain, for me, a touchstone of something exceptionally special as an icon of excellence, but the practical margin between it and good mass produced cars pretty much evaporated in the 1920s.
Even so, the holidays are approaching and I am amenable to a gift of fine examples of any of the above.
 
Alberto86 said:
Hello all.

I was wondering if anybody compared the dynaco st 35 vs mcintosh mc30.

I run a pair of klipschorn with a new built dynakit st35 from dynakitparts and it works great, particularly after I added Telefunken pre tubes.

I’m curious to know if anybody did that comparison because I read many good comments about the mc30 and I was thinking to get a pair to replace the st35.

Obviously it’s not about quality price I’m after.

Any comment is welcomed.

Best

AB
Click to expand...


I can't speak of the ST-35, since never had one, but have run the comparison you mentioned with several ST70's and the MC30s.

At one time, owned 4 ST-70s to compare stock vs. various aftermarket input boards. Stock vs. stock though, the MC30 has a bit better focus, is much more dynamic and has bass that seems to go an octave lower.

The hot rodded ST-70s compared to the MC30s closed the gap somewhat, but did not better the MC30s.

The comparison is not really fair though since the MC30s cost considerably more than the ST70 when new.

The MC30 also gives you a much wider range in output tubes to use; anything from a 6L6 to a KT66 or even a 6550 if you reset the bias.

If you really like the EL84 sound, but want more power, consider a pair of EICO HF-30s, or the later version of the VTL TT's. Both use a quartet of el84s for about 35 watts per channel.

best
 
I think the MC30 monoblock was the first of the type to make it into the consumer market. It had a lot going for it in quality and performance, poised against mainly Williamsons. I mentioned the. Marantz amps earlier, which were as the model 2 monoblocks no-compromise Mullard 5-20 based. The model 5 were "steamlined" model 2 monoblocks, and the 8/8B dual model 5 stereo amps.
The MC30 wasn't extravegantly costly and sold very well, there was just a lot of competition at all levels with each proclaiming their virtues, actual and aspirational. Mac was justifiably proud of performance that could be verified in the lab as well as the field. Few suffered spontaneous organic failure from transformer failure, a not uncommon end to some of the overstressed overrated competition.
 
I used a stock-ish Dyna 70 in the early 1980s and liked it, but went thru a succession of solid state amps afterward. I now have a somewhat original Marantz model 8 with fresh tubes in occasional use in the experimental system and a few solid state amps rotating thru the main system. I haven't used any McIntosh gear at home tho I've refurbed some vintage examples.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom