• 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

Help with MC 2102 vs MC 275V

Q

quinlanmw

New Member
Gentlemen:

Hopefully someone can help me out here..I've searched the archives enough to make my eyes bleed....

Quick history: I've been lurking for a while as I continue my search for the perfect Mac amp combination for my Klipschorns. I began with the MA-6500, then traded up for the MC-252 paired with C-2200. But I couldn't stop thinking about how an all tube setup would sound. My dealer had a MK-275V on his floor and allowed me to audition it with my system and compare with the MC 252.

Wow! The light came on and I finally understood what the tube thing is all about. I think the MC 252 is fantastic, but the MC 275 with my speakers in a "bright" room was clearly a way better match. But the blue meters seduce me, so I picked up a MC 2102 from another dealer's showroom to audition. My original dealer graciously allowed me to borrow the MC 275 again so I could compare the two.

Here's my problem: the MC 2102 requires significantly more gain to achieve a similar volume level to the MC 275, if that makes sense. In other words, if I play the MC 275 at "30", to reach what seems to be the same volume on the MC 2102 requires level "35 to 37". I am using identical unbalanced cables on both amps, with the input selector on each amp set to "unbalanced". I am using the 8 ohm taps on both amps.

Has anyone else noticed this difference between these amps? The MC 2102 doesn't seem to be defective as far as the sound goes. Could tube burn-in be a factor? I was told that the MC 2102 had about 2 hours total time on it.

This is complicating my comparison of these amps. My first impression is that the MC 275 wins hands down in terms of presence and bass response, but this could also be the case if I'm hearing the MC 275 at higher volume, couldn't it?

My second question: Are the later production MC 2102s manufactured with fiber optic lighting? The meters have a pale, almost green "washed out" look when compared with my C2200 with the LED light kit installed by Audio Classics. If not, is an LED light kit mod available for the MC 2102? I hate to say it, but the disparity in meter lighting would be a deal breaker for me if I decide I prefer the sound of the MC 2102.

I'm out of most of you guys' league, except for maybe one thing..I've become obsessed with this quest.

Thanks for your patience .

Mike
 
Register to hide this ad
Mike,
The 2102 is less sensitive than the 275 by a factor of 2, or 6 dB. So what you are seeing is exactly what would be predicted by the specs. No problemo. You have to match the levels, increasing the drive to the 2102. Otherwise it's not a fair fight, louder always wins in A/B comparisons. As far as I know, the later 2102's still use incandescent lighting. I'm waiting for the fiber optic lighting kit from AC. It will come, Ryan says later this year. So let your ears be your guide, and good listening! I think the 2102 is an elegant looking amplifier. You can search this forum for others who have compared the two amps. I am biased as I am running 2 x 2102's with a C2300.
 
If you’ve got a c2200 the meters there will do it for your system. If you like the 275 better go for it. The mc2102 has no upgrade LED kit yet for the meters as far as I know but the meters should match your c2200. They were desinged to work as a pair.

As for the level difference, I have no idea why the 275 would appear to be louder at a certain volume level.

I have a mc2012 and a MA2275 and I know the 275 well. In terms of overall power the 275 does about 90 in the midband and the 2102 does about 120. The 2102 does sound more powerful to my ears which is helpful with my speakers. Soundwize they are similar.

If you have had the good fortune of having been able to audition both, just pick the one you like best.

Honestly, I could live with either.
 
The 275MKV has a 1.2v unbalanced sensitivity vs 2.5V on the 2102. That explains the difference. You should always try to compare at the same listening level otherwise the louder version will always win as stated by others already. Recording engineers have figured this out a long time ago, the louder the CD sounds, the better it will sell, the price we all now have to pay. The MC275MKIV has an adjustable sensitivity by the way, the version V does not.
 
ruffoc said:
IThe mc2102 has no upgrade LED kit yet for the meters as far as I know but the meters should match your c2200. They were desinged to work as a pair.
Click to expand...

I am also waiting for LED Kits for MC2000 .... :D

And I can definitely live with ANY McIntosh tube amps! They are simply sweet sounding! :thmbsp: :thmbsp: :thmbsp:

Cheers! :thmbsp:
 
Thanks, guys, I would never have known to look at the sensitivity specs. This forum really is a great resource. It's funny though, I had read extensively through the archives re: MC2102 vs MC 275 and never saw this mentioned.

As for the meter lighting, I could have sworn in my searches that I came across a post somewhere that said current production models of the MC 2102 have the updated lighting.

Perhaps a forum member who has recently purchased a new MC 2102 could confirm or deny this?

Thanks,

Mike
 
Mike, do you (did you) have the two amps plugged into different inputs on the C2200. . . . and if so were both of those inputs adjusted (trimmed) to the same input sensitivity? See page 15 of the C2200 Owner's Manual.

Neil
 
Neil,

I'm running the two amps from outputs 1 and 2 on the C2200.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought the trim level function on the C2200 was for input sources only. I've been listening through the CD input, the trim of which I've never adjusted.

But regardless, whatever the CD input level is trimmed at wouldn't it be the same for outputs 1 and 2?

Thanks for the responses...

Mike
 
quinlanmw said:
As for the meter lighting, I could have sworn in my searches that I came across a post somewhere that said current production models of the MC 2102 have the updated lighting.
Click to expand...
Nope, they all use bulbs.

A while ago I compared the MC275 and MC2102 with my Avalon Eclipse speakers and they sounded very similar. I did like the MC275 slightly better, I thought it had a little more detail. To be fair, the MC2102 I listened to was over a year old and the MC275 was brand new.

Another factor is the MC2102 makes much more heat than the MC275.
 
Mike,

On my speakers, the 275 MKIV was better than the 2102.
Neil explained in an other topic why technically, the 275 could be better than the 2102.
To me, the 275 seemed more powerful and alive than the 2102. But that's just a question of taste.
 
you're right! my bad ;-)

quinlanmw said:
Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought the trim level function on the C2200 was for input sources only. I've been listening through the CD input, the trim of which I've never adjusted
Click to expand...
I meant outputs and yes, it's the C2200 inputs that are adjustable:yes:

Comparing the two amps, the 275 has:
1) about 5 times times input impedance of the 2102 (either balanced or unbalanced.)
2) and the ratio of the C2200 output impedance to the two amps' input impedances (again balanced or unbalanced) is 4.5 times higher for the 275 than the 2102.

So, although the 2102 is a bit more powerful than the 275 (which is actually 95 watts now, not 75) and a bit more sensitive, nevertheless, the electrical synergy between the C2200 and the MC275 is better (i.e. a much higher ratio between amp input impedance to preamp output impedance) enabling the C2200 to drive the MC275 more efficiently; and I'm guessing that's what accounts for (a big part of) the slight power output differences between the two amps.

Frankly, I was quite surprised at the low input impedance figure(s) for the 2102 :scratch2: The bottom line IMO after scrutinizing all this is: for best performance (both efficiency AND sonics), it would probably be better to drive the 2102 with a solid state preamp which typically have 10 - 30 ohm output impedance, as opposed to trying to pair it up with the C2200 tube preamp which has a 250/500ohm output (bal./unbal.) The C2200/MC275 would be the hot combo :yes:
 
A C2200 with a 2102 would have a input/output ratio of 80:1 (unbalanced) which is considered more than enough. A 10:1 ratio is usually considered "adequate". The 2102 actually has better damping factor of 18 vs 14 for the 275 but we are splitting hairs here.
 
By the way, the 501s have even lower input impedance at only 10,000 unbalanced than a 2102 and that doesn't make a C2200 and 501s a bad sounding combo... :smoke:
 
Thanks for the input gentlemen, especially those who provided technical explanations of impedance figures of these amps when combined with the C2200.

I have both amps through the weekend and will continue to listen and compare. I've read many past posts where someone would ask which was the better between the two amps, and members happily chimed in with their opinions. Most owned one or the other, and had at least heard both, but I'm not sure how many had directly compared the two. I thought I had the perfect situation when I was able to corral both amps for a side by side comparison.

Given the sensitivity differences and the fact that my lack of measuring equipment makes volume matching between these amps "ballpark" at best, this is proving more difficult than I expected. In the end I suspect my choice will be purely an emotional one, arrived at on a gut level impression as opposed to clearly definable characteristics that I could articulate on this forum. I must admit that I went into this with a distinct bias towards the MC 2102...the MC 275V, while beautiful in its own right, does not fit in with my vision of my final Mcintosh system, unified in its appearance and visual presentation. I really wanted to like the MC 2102.

Yes, it's all about the music, but I'm willing to admit that the visual appeal of Mac gear strikes me on an emotional level before a single note is played. However, when I first compared the MC 275V with my MC 252 I knew, within 30 seconds, that in my system and listening conditions the MC 275V was a slam dunk.

Having said that, I'll provide my initial impressions up to this point, though not in the poetic terms many of you employ so impressively. I wouldn't characterize myself as an audiophile, but I assure you my ears are working fine.

Both of these amps are impressive, and sonically very, very close, IMHO. I agree with an earlier comment that I could easily live with either. But when I read comments that describe the MC275V as more alive, with slightly more detail than the MC 2102, my initial response is yes! that's exactly what I'm hearing. It just seems to have a bit more "presence". I'd say the MC2102 is slightly warmer, perhaps a bit smoother. The MC 275V seems to have a bit more clarity in the midrange and slightly more punch in the low end. These differences are very, very subtle, but seem consistent so far.

I'll continue to evaluate this weekend. If anyone's interested I'll report back with my final impressions. And I welcome any tips others may have that may help me with this un-scientific test.

Thanks,

Mike
 
quinlanmw said:
I'll continue to evaluate this weekend. If anyone's interested I'll report back with my final impressions. And I welcome any tips others may have that may help me with this un-scientific test.

Thanks,

Mike
Click to expand...

quinlanmw.......Yes, Mike, I am interested in your impressions on both of these amps. I am a previous MC275 owner, and moved to 501's, but still miss the MC275. Definately keep us informed.
 
I agree that the balanced inputs are preferable. For this comparison, though, I chose to use unbalanced because I only have one set of balanced cables and did not want to add the time delay between comparisons by shutting the amp down to change the input cables.

Also, admittedly I'm a tube neophyte, but I felt that once the tubes were warmed up it would be preferable to keep the amps on as I switched back and forth between them. Not sure about that, but that was my thinking...

Thanks,

Mike
 
Final Impression

Gentlemen,

I continued my listening comparisons of the two amps through the weekend. As I stated earlier, my test was decidedly un-scientific, although I took pains to eliminate as many variables as possible. I was worried that my inability to precisely equalize the listening volume between the two amps due to their different input impedances would skew my impressions, and I cannot state unequivocably that I was able to exactly equalize the volumes. I did take the time to experiment with several different levels on the MC 2102, always leaving the MC 275 volume constant, and would play the same 20 to 30 second musical passage on each, intending to "bracket" the matched volume until I finally reached it. I'm confident I got as close to it as possible, given that these are different amps with (supposedly) their own unique sonic characteristics. Interestingly, the level I settled on ended up being the same as that when I first fired up the MC 2102 and realized I needed to boost the volume to reach my customary listening level.

I tried different comparison scenarios...listening to short passages..listening to entire songs..listening to an entire album, taking a break then switching amps and listening to it again...I even left one amp playing for a few hours while I did other things and the following day repeated this process for the other amp. In the end I decided that playing the short passage, switching amps and then listening again provided the best head to head comparison.

I will say that each amp, when I played it for an extended period, left me with the same impression..."man, that sounds sweet..this amp is fantastic!"

I reported earlier that my first impression between the two was that the MC 275V seemed slightly more alive, more detailed, with more clarity in the mid range and slightly more punch on the low end (again, these differences were very, very subtle.) Now, after several days of listening to both I don't think I can make that statement. In fact, by the time I wrapped this up last night these amps sounded more alike than ever.

I'm aware that fatigue can be a factor, in the sense that differences in sound perceived at the beginning can tend to blend in to one another after several iterations of playing a passage, getting up, switching speaker cables, adjusting listening volume, then returning to the listening chair and listening again (my speakers are in an adjacent room). And I must admit that there were times that I forgot which amp I was actually hearing until I got up to switch cables. When I reached this point I would shut everything down and resume later with a fresher mind.

Also, there is a chance that as I put more time on the MC 2102 tubes that they were gradually settling in (I was told it had 2 hours total on it when I began this process..now, perhaps 20 hours). I don't know how much time was on the MC 275V, but I'm the third customer to take it home for audition.

So, after all that I can say that these are both wonderful amps, which sonically sound so close that I am unable to pick a definitive winner. And remember I began this evaluation with a bias towards the MC 2102 for its aesthetics, already having imagined its placement in a rack of matching Mac gear.

I have learned that first impressions can be the most powerful, and in that respect I have to give the nod to the MC 275V. And given the substantial price difference between the two, the performance of the MC 275V is that much more impressive. I would be delighted to own the MC 2102, and I know it would provide many years of enjoyment. But I can't escape the feeling that the MC 275V is a truly special piece of gear, and that if I don't get one I might always regret it.

If any of you are still reading by this point I thank you for your patience, especially the old hand Mac-aphiles. Hopefully this will be useful for the relative newbies like me who are closer to the beginning of their Macintosh journey (I keep telling myself there will be an end).

Respectfully,

Mike
 
Interesting read. I ran my Klipschorns with a pair of MC30's when I had them. That was a nice combo for a while. Need low wattage tube gear to combat those aggressive horns. I'm sure the 275 sounds nice with them.
 
quinlanmw.......I enjoyed reading your review, and as a previous MC275 MkV owner (and a future MC275 MkV owner) I feel comfortable saying that I think you made an excellent choice. The MC275 is an amplifier that has stood the test of time for one reason, it sounds wonderful. The newest version, the MC275 MkV embraces all the original sound, and brings the amp up to date with many improvements, all of which will insure many years of owner satisfaction. The MC275 has a way of endearing itself to owners. It truly is a very special amplifier. Congratulations on your choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom