damacman
Resident Psycho
You're missing the point. Do your HDMI switching via the TV ... the beauty of the C45 is that it lacks that - otherwise, it's just another MX unit.
Last edited:
HT shipwrecked.......newer Mc Home Theater preamps with vintage Mc amps.....and other questions.
- Thread starter Audible Nectar
- Start date
I agree about HDMI. I spoke to Ryan about it today and he said the C 45 would work but probably wouldn't do what I would want it to do. The 5.1 inputs are analog only.
SomeGeoffGuy
Active Member
I get what you are saying, but It creates more issues than it solves for me. One is that I have more HDMI inputs than my TV can handle, and the other is that my MAC6700 would be the odd man out, and I would need an additional amp. I would settle for solving the HDMI only, though, because shopping for a new amp would be awesome (just don't tell my wife).
-Geoff
damacman
Resident Psycho
Recall when I used the words oft misunderstood. The beauty of the C45 is that is analog and can easily be mated to HT sources with internal decoders. For example, a friend owns one. He uses a MAC-3 on one 5.1 input and a Pioneer DV-09 on the other. He has a few legacy video products tied to the MAC-3. His TV has enough video switching to accommodate them all. He also has a tt, cdp, and other 2ch sources connected to the C45. So for him, it's perfect as it allows him to bridge the gap between home theater and 2-ch in a single box, offers excellent audio performance, and doesn't share all of the challenges that the MX units have.
Of course, I don't think I'd pair a C45 with a MAC6700 either - I didn't catch that as I was on my iPhone. As it has PASSTHRU functionality, it could be easily mated to any AVP or AVR you may like. Then, you'd have all the HDMI switching you'd need for HT and could still use the 6700 as you are with your 2-ch sources. [For example, the RCA STEREO AUDIO OUT of your Oppo 205 connects to the CD (or DVD) inputs of the 6700, the HDMI video output of the Oppo ties to the TV, and the HDMI hi-rez output of the Oppo ties to your AVP/AVR so that you can decode multi-ch audio discs.] This is exactly what I do with my C200 and Integra DHC-80.6.
Of course, I don't think I'd pair a C45 with a MAC6700 either - I didn't catch that as I was on my iPhone. As it has PASSTHRU functionality, it could be easily mated to any AVP or AVR you may like. Then, you'd have all the HDMI switching you'd need for HT and could still use the 6700 as you are with your 2-ch sources. [For example, the RCA STEREO AUDIO OUT of your Oppo 205 connects to the CD (or DVD) inputs of the 6700, the HDMI video output of the Oppo ties to the TV, and the HDMI hi-rez output of the Oppo ties to your AVP/AVR so that you can decode multi-ch audio discs.] This is exactly what I do with my C200 and Integra DHC-80.6.
That would be me.
SomeGeoffGuy
Active Member
I am using the Analog out in the Oppo exactly as you are describing. Two channels go to the 6700, and the rest got to a Rotel 976 amp bridged to three channels. It sounds great, but switching the Oppo from 2-channel to 5.1 involves going into a fourth level sub-menu on the Oppo (video menu too) and re-configuring the speaker count - kind of a pain. The problem only pops up when I want to play a CD (which is something my wife likes to listen to, and I need to keep the stereo friendly to her), but the Oppo will process a CD into 5.1 and it won't sound right through two speakers. I know - first world problems!
I think ultimately, I would like to move the home theater and HDMI switching portion into one reasonably priced simple to use component.
-Geoff
damacman
Resident Psycho
I also have the 205. I can play 2ch SACDs, CDs, Streamed audio, etc right to my C200 via XLR or multi-ch discs in native format via the AVP. I've never used the 5.1 analog outputs though...
If you're looking for ease of use, the dual preamp strategy via the HT Passthru is pretty simple for the whole family to use. You'll be the only guy using only the 6700 ... everyone else - press this button and everything comes on and the cable tv is live. I even programmed our cox cable remote to control my AVP and turn on both the AVP and TV from the power button. All four power amps come on sequentially as well. When I use only the C200, only the MC2600s are turned on - no surround amp, sub amp, or TV.
The MX119 seems to have possibilities, albeit no room correction, etc, but for the sonics might be an option. The simplicity (or at least more simple/less computer board complexity) might serve me well here, seems less complex in that sense, as I don't need beyond 5.1 or 5.2 (two sub cabs, but they are behind the mains so 5.1 should work with miniDSP running sub EQ). I've also been looking at Anthem AVR 70 and Marantz AV8805 as "latest new" options but I can't get one for a few months so I'm not rushing and just soaking up all the info I can. I figure no need to hurry in the interest of getting it right. I also thought about, if I could get an MX119 reasonably priced that I could turn if it wasn't workable, that this might be worth a try. There seems a lot of possibility there, though......these don't cost what the later Mac HT preamps seem to......
If I had an Oppo 205 I just might be able to work with the C45 albeit the fact that the 5.1 optical outs seen as universal on so much stuff wouldn't 't be so much an option. Stuff like using the cable box 5.1 optical out, or the same out of my Sony display (where I use my computer into the Sony, then 5.1 optical sound out of the Sony to a basic processor) is stuff I really got used to and can separate out aud and vid to do "end around" installs to allow legacy gear and other stuff to work. I seem to need and use the legacy as much as I do the HDMI, and even then not having an issue running HDMI to TV only. It's not super slick convenient, but it works, and I've done it for a decade already.
If I ran a mini-DSP setup on the subs that would be the majority of room correct that I would really need, though. The room correct stuff is nice but I could and would run a DSP on the subs and solve what I really would want solved WRT that issue.
I've slowed down the "pace" and am soaking it all in as I rebuild the Cornwalls step by step. No hurry, deep in the think tank here, contemplating every option.
BACK TO AMPLIFIERS.........
So how reliable are 5 channel Mac amps (like the MC205)? I'm considering two amp options in the realm of Mac:
Use my two MC250s (which I will have electrically restored if I choose this option as they are due) and an added MC2100/2105 (that I would purchase and have restored) to run as follows:
MC2100 or 2105 on mains
MC250 bridged mono to the center
MC250 running the two rears
I have two MC250 now, pretty examples, and would buy an MC2100/2105 and have them completely restored for the long haul. This would cost about 5K.
OR........
I could just buy an MC205 late model and be done with it. One chassis, simple, easy to "own/have around". But it's NOT autoformered (I wonder how much of an issue this really is, especially on Cornwalls where the woofer runs around 3.7ish ohms) where I want the amp to "handle" that properly. I suspect I'll be good with the "Mac sound" in either case - they seem to review well, even for those speakers, but I wonder what those in a Mac centered forum would have to say about the amplifier choices laid out here. Especially for Klipsch Cornwalls and the impedance swing (from high 3 's ohm on the woofer through the 8-12 ohm range moving through the mid to upper freqs....)
The MC205 is also about a $4-5K proposition (and would still have a pair of Mac 250 off to the side, maybe rebuild one as 2 channel backup??)
I KNOW that the old MC250 and similarly autoformered/tubish sounding like amps love the old Klipsch Heritage, and while I'm not adverse to having a more "modern Mac" type of presentation (and in fact might even welcome it as I have a two channel tune system that scratches a bunch of those itches) I'm wondering why amplifier advice and considerations might be offered here for the HT, where the musicality is still a big consideration. The 200WPC MC205 would assure I wouldn't run out of power, but I wonder about how that is at 3 watts, where I know the MC250s do really well on the low to moderate side of the power usage.
Thoughts?
If I had an Oppo 205 I just might be able to work with the C45 albeit the fact that the 5.1 optical outs seen as universal on so much stuff wouldn't 't be so much an option. Stuff like using the cable box 5.1 optical out, or the same out of my Sony display (where I use my computer into the Sony, then 5.1 optical sound out of the Sony to a basic processor) is stuff I really got used to and can separate out aud and vid to do "end around" installs to allow legacy gear and other stuff to work. I seem to need and use the legacy as much as I do the HDMI, and even then not having an issue running HDMI to TV only. It's not super slick convenient, but it works, and I've done it for a decade already.
If I ran a mini-DSP setup on the subs that would be the majority of room correct that I would really need, though. The room correct stuff is nice but I could and would run a DSP on the subs and solve what I really would want solved WRT that issue.
I've slowed down the "pace" and am soaking it all in as I rebuild the Cornwalls step by step. No hurry, deep in the think tank here, contemplating every option.
BACK TO AMPLIFIERS.........
So how reliable are 5 channel Mac amps (like the MC205)? I'm considering two amp options in the realm of Mac:
Use my two MC250s (which I will have electrically restored if I choose this option as they are due) and an added MC2100/2105 (that I would purchase and have restored) to run as follows:
MC2100 or 2105 on mains
MC250 bridged mono to the center
MC250 running the two rears
I have two MC250 now, pretty examples, and would buy an MC2100/2105 and have them completely restored for the long haul. This would cost about 5K.
OR........
I could just buy an MC205 late model and be done with it. One chassis, simple, easy to "own/have around". But it's NOT autoformered (I wonder how much of an issue this really is, especially on Cornwalls where the woofer runs around 3.7ish ohms) where I want the amp to "handle" that properly. I suspect I'll be good with the "Mac sound" in either case - they seem to review well, even for those speakers, but I wonder what those in a Mac centered forum would have to say about the amplifier choices laid out here. Especially for Klipsch Cornwalls and the impedance swing (from high 3 's ohm on the woofer through the 8-12 ohm range moving through the mid to upper freqs....)
The MC205 is also about a $4-5K proposition (and would still have a pair of Mac 250 off to the side, maybe rebuild one as 2 channel backup??)
I KNOW that the old MC250 and similarly autoformered/tubish sounding like amps love the old Klipsch Heritage, and while I'm not adverse to having a more "modern Mac" type of presentation (and in fact might even welcome it as I have a two channel tune system that scratches a bunch of those itches) I'm wondering why amplifier advice and considerations might be offered here for the HT, where the musicality is still a big consideration. The 200WPC MC205 would assure I wouldn't run out of power, but I wonder about how that is at 3 watts, where I know the MC250s do really well on the low to moderate side of the power usage.
Thoughts?
I have an MX121 (same era as the MX151). Amplification is a 5 channel MC7205. Prior to acquiring this pair, I had been using an EAD combination. The EAD Ovation pre/pro was just so liquid is it's sound signature. But, it was an older 5.1 pre that was short on analog inputs, no HDMI and no recent Dolby or DTS codecs. So I was going to sell them.
Prior to getting the McIntosh pair, I tried an Anthem pre/pro powered by the same EAD 5 ch amp and it just didn't compare to the EAD's sound. Almost dry sounding. So, I decided to give the McIntosh a try. Granted, these were used and still quite expensive. Sonically, it was almost a match for the EADs. Used the MX121 for a brief time with the EAD Powermaster 1000 prior to picking up the MC7205.
I like the flexibility of the menu system to taylor inputs and outputs and even though it predates 4K, that's not a problem.
Bottom line, just like the EAD, I don't think about sonic shortcomings. This wasn't the case with other pre/pros I owned in the past prior to getting the EADs. With the Mac, It just sound so good.
I have a 119 in another system. rarely use it for 5.1 but I do have the capability. It's great for 2 channel. No room correction but for me, I prefer to adjust manually anyway and the 119 has trim controls that are simple with no on screen menus. The only draw back is no HDMI switching so you'll have to run audio cables from your sources separately. It's been bullet proof for many years and I have no need to upgrade.
I haven't read this entire thread, but I'll pass along a few short thoughts. I've had 4 preamps driving my MC-7106 in my theater, in chronological order: 1) Rotel Receiver (acting as preamp); 2) Krell HTS; 3) Sunfire Theater Grand IV; 4) Emotiva UMC-200.
Nothing sounded better than the Krell HTS, but it was pre-HDMI and a little quirky in operation. I thought the Sunfire (being newer) would be the Krell's sonic equal and welcomed HDMI switching -- it didn't sound as good but operationally was better (no longer needed an external HDMI switch). The Emotiva UMC-200 was much less expensive than the prior two, and I absolutely love its compact size. On its own (without room correction), the Emotiva sounded as good or better than the Sunfire, but still not as good as the Krell.
However, with the room EQ (that only the Emotiva had), the Emotiva sounds better than all of the prior.
My advice for considering older AV preamps (or AVR's as a preamp) is:
1. Get something with room EQ -- it is worthwhile for theater use (or even for music in difficult rooms) and EQ will outweigh other factors regarding real world sound quality
2. Make sure to get a preamp that supports Dolby Digital Plus (7.1) even if you plan to only ever use 5.1. I say this because Roku started packing DD 5.1 content into a DD+ format (with better compression) to save on bandwidth. That change broke 5.1 for Roku content on my basement AVR that only supported DD and not DD+.
Nothing sounded better than the Krell HTS, but it was pre-HDMI and a little quirky in operation. I thought the Sunfire (being newer) would be the Krell's sonic equal and welcomed HDMI switching -- it didn't sound as good but operationally was better (no longer needed an external HDMI switch). The Emotiva UMC-200 was much less expensive than the prior two, and I absolutely love its compact size. On its own (without room correction), the Emotiva sounded as good or better than the Sunfire, but still not as good as the Krell.
However, with the room EQ (that only the Emotiva had), the Emotiva sounds better than all of the prior.
My advice for considering older AV preamps (or AVR's as a preamp) is:
1. Get something with room EQ -- it is worthwhile for theater use (or even for music in difficult rooms) and EQ will outweigh other factors regarding real world sound quality
2. Make sure to get a preamp that supports Dolby Digital Plus (7.1) even if you plan to only ever use 5.1. I say this because Roku started packing DD 5.1 content into a DD+ format (with better compression) to save on bandwidth. That change broke 5.1 for Roku content on my basement AVR that only supported DD and not DD+.
SomeGeoffGuy
Active Member
I have been looking at Emotiva. They have dropped all of their low end offerings for now, though, assuming because of the chip shortage. I was looking at the successor to the 200 as an option (I think it was the BasX-700 or something). It is small enough to fit in my rack without giving up any other components too, which is a big plus! Having to put the new GIANT PS5 next to the rack already gets me some dirty looks from the wife - the PS4 used to fit on the bottom shelf.
-Geoff
SomeGeoffGuy
Active Member
Sounds line an awesome setup! I hope to be that integrated someday. Too many other projects around the house to spend a Saturday playing with wiring right now. Once all these suppliers get back in stock though, I might have to spend some time optimizing before buying a new processor. I just need to decide.
I hate to give up the 6700 - not only is it my first McIntosh, it also sounds absolutely incredible, has the HD Radio upgraded tuner, and I actually like the DAC in it better than the Oppo (I did an A to B on a Raamstein Depeche Mode Cover of "Stripped" and I couldn't believe what the Oppo did to the synths...). I plan on retiring with it, although I don't rule out a new separates based McIntosh system someday! Best system I ever heard was a C2600 into MC611's and 800D3's. I wouldn't mind that setup someday if I ever get a room big enough!
-Geoff
My Krell HTS sounded the best of any of my AV preamps for home theater, but shockingly awful for 2-channel. Maybe because of the lack of a "pure direct" mode to bypass DSP. I could never figure out why 2-channel didn't sound good, but that system was used for theater 99% of the time, so it didn't bother me.
Yes, the replacement is the Emotiva MC-700 (https://emotiva.com/products/mc-700) is also no longer available (the link says a replacement is coming). The MC-700 which gains 4K video support and 6 HDMI input (vs. the UMC-200 1080p and 4 HDMI input) but, the MC-700 loses FM for some odd reason. It's a very good AV preamp -- only limitation is that it doesn't have a huge number of analog inputs. Presumably a replacement is coming (if Emotiva's comments are to be believed).
SomeGeoffGuy
Active Member
That would work for me even without FM. I just need it for HDMI switching and room correction.
-Geoff
The Krell for HT was really something.else. Krell's "house sound" (especially when Dan D was head of Krell) was crystal clear yet very "impact-y" - I liken it to the sports car side of a high end HT, Mac being more of the comfort side I suppose. Normally, Krell isn't what I would go to for Klipsch, just a bit too "steely" at times, but it was 25% of original price and for HT was a real hit. But that Krell was as horrible at 2 channel as it was good at HT - I really had a hard time conceiving of that wide of a gulf between those two things in one piece. Of course I understand the value/necessity of a 2 channel direct/etc but even in a half hearted effort would have expected better. But designing this stuff is harder than it looks I suppose 
It was also rather early in the HT processor world for those kind of pieces, that was wayyyyyyyyyy ahead of the curve, this life-in-foodservice cat owning a Krell. I made the most of it.
I'm trying to ascertain just how far back (or forward/recent, I should say) on the Dolby Digital I need to go to assure the DD+ compatibility. It was supposed to be backward compatible to 5.1 DD, but now, apparently not always, and as this is one aspect I would like to take advantage of, am curious how far back in the Mac line (or anyone else's, for that matter) I need to go to have DD+ as I sense that's the new 5.1 digital standard for the new era (like optical 5.1 was out of cable boxes, I suppose) that will be the norm. So I'm wondering how late/what DD version I need to assure decoding of DD+, I don't seem to see that specifically mentioned/listed like the other dolby "steps/adavnces" in DD formats on the unit faces.
I am also attempting to "process", pardon the pun, the possibilities with the C45, as I had looked at a Parasound pre that is similar and has me asking if I could just get a decoder with a bunch of Digital-ins and run the 5.1 out of that to the C 45, then take a multidisc machine and plug it into the other. Instead of swapping preamps just think of it as swapping processors, I suppose.....but what should I use that would avoid making whatever it is I use as decoder not end up sounding like a cheap pre? I'm assuming a late model AV receiver, I'm not seeing "just a decoder"/HDMI-various ins with an analog out without buying a receiver - or a higher end pre which I was looking to do good 2CH. The Multidisc player isn't so much a mystery, I suppose, the 5.1 analog outs to the C45, but I wonder about broadcast streaming and optical/legacy connections that I occasionally dip into that would allow whatever hookups I end up with to process through - a D/A converter for all the various formats out there. I DO use streaming concert and other streaming services that are not of the YouTube/other apps well known, but just using a computer browser to access a certain site, and that's also a critical aspect of what I want to do here. My personal computer (Apple currently) is also a component in that sense and needs to be incorporated somehow. We are also looking into cutting the cord and going streaming full time, but won't make a move until we figure out how best to do this in the context of the system being built.
It was also rather early in the HT processor world for those kind of pieces, that was wayyyyyyyyyy ahead of the curve, this life-in-foodservice cat owning a Krell. I made the most of it.I'm trying to ascertain just how far back (or forward/recent, I should say) on the Dolby Digital I need to go to assure the DD+ compatibility. It was supposed to be backward compatible to 5.1 DD, but now, apparently not always, and as this is one aspect I would like to take advantage of, am curious how far back in the Mac line (or anyone else's, for that matter) I need to go to have DD+ as I sense that's the new 5.1 digital standard for the new era (like optical 5.1 was out of cable boxes, I suppose) that will be the norm. So I'm wondering how late/what DD version I need to assure decoding of DD+, I don't seem to see that specifically mentioned/listed like the other dolby "steps/adavnces" in DD formats on the unit faces.
I am also attempting to "process", pardon the pun, the possibilities with the C45, as I had looked at a Parasound pre that is similar and has me asking if I could just get a decoder with a bunch of Digital-ins and run the 5.1 out of that to the C 45, then take a multidisc machine and plug it into the other. Instead of swapping preamps just think of it as swapping processors, I suppose.....but what should I use that would avoid making whatever it is I use as decoder not end up sounding like a cheap pre? I'm assuming a late model AV receiver, I'm not seeing "just a decoder"/HDMI-various ins with an analog out without buying a receiver - or a higher end pre which I was looking to do good 2CH. The Multidisc player isn't so much a mystery, I suppose, the 5.1 analog outs to the C45, but I wonder about broadcast streaming and optical/legacy connections that I occasionally dip into that would allow whatever hookups I end up with to process through - a D/A converter for all the various formats out there. I DO use streaming concert and other streaming services that are not of the YouTube/other apps well known, but just using a computer browser to access a certain site, and that's also a critical aspect of what I want to do here. My personal computer (Apple currently) is also a component in that sense and needs to be incorporated somehow. We are also looking into cutting the cord and going streaming full time, but won't make a move until we figure out how best to do this in the context of the system being built.
W9TR
Super Member
I have an MX 151 I purchased used about 8 years ago. My goal is to stay on flat end of the depreciation curve. It has run flawlessly since I bought it. For the latest video and audio formats I use two inputs on my projector to switch 4K hdmi and the decoders in my OppO 205 for the latest audio formats.
Would I replace it with another when it fails? That’s uncertain.
The method easiest on the pocketbook would be to buy something from Marantz or Denon 1-2 generations back and live with some external switching, etc. The depreciation on these units is so dramatic that I would never buy a new one from any brand.
These pre/pros are complicated beasts and all contain a lot of modules and sub-systems built by third parties. That is why they are so hard to service.
I doubt any one brand is more reliable than any other. Since there is no data on the subject, we are left with anecdotal evidence, and there it’s plenty of it for every brand.
For now my MX 151 sounds fantastic for HT and I use passthru with a C 1100 for stereo. All I have to do is power on one or the other and the system just works.
Would I replace it with another when it fails? That’s uncertain.
The method easiest on the pocketbook would be to buy something from Marantz or Denon 1-2 generations back and live with some external switching, etc. The depreciation on these units is so dramatic that I would never buy a new one from any brand.
These pre/pros are complicated beasts and all contain a lot of modules and sub-systems built by third parties. That is why they are so hard to service.
I doubt any one brand is more reliable than any other. Since there is no data on the subject, we are left with anecdotal evidence, and there it’s plenty of it for every brand.
For now my MX 151 sounds fantastic for HT and I use passthru with a C 1100 for stereo. All I have to do is power on one or the other and the system just works.
The Krell for HT was really something.else. Krell's "house sound" (especially when Dan D was head of Krell) was crystal clear yet very "impact-y" - I liken it to the sports car side of a high end HT, Mac being more of the comfort side I suppose. Normally, Krell isn't what I would go to for Klipsch, just a bit too "steely" at times, but it was 25% of original price and for HT was a real hit. But that Krell was as horrible at 2 channel as it was good at HT - I really had a hard time conceiving of that wide of a gulf between those two things in one piece. Of course I understand the value/necessity of a 2 channel direct/etc but even in a half hearted effort would have expected better. But designing this stuff is harder than it looks I suppose
You're the first person I've seen echo my "Jekyll & Hyde" experiences with the Krell. Was yours the HTS? There was nothing better for surround sound (the bass was astronomically great) and nothing worse for 2-channel music. I could never figure it out either. It was early days, and direct buttons were not common yet, I don't think, but you'd think Krell would have thought to have included it. Maybe they didn't want to cannibalize 2-channel amp -- I don't know. Even without a direct button, music should have sounded better than it did.
It's impossible to predict the future, but I'm guessing anything that supports 7.1 would have some longevity. The only thing I've seen that broke DD was Roku, where Netflix/Prime/Xfinity were passing 5.1 (DD) in a DD+ format (even though all the labels in Roku still called it DD). I had a 5.1 AVR I couldn't change, so I ended up buying an older Roku Ultra 4640 (the only Roku that supported Dolby transcoding) that could convert it back to 5.1 for my old AVR. The newest Roku Ultra 4680 has Dolby transcoding, but does not have an optical out.
I suspect a lot of other stuff still works with just DD, but the Roku example seems to be "writing on the wall" that looking for DD+ is a safer option.
Yep, it was the Krell HTS (Home Theater Standard). The 2 channel performance was poor enough I'm sorta glad it died, now I have to replace it But the HT side was why I bought it of course, hoping for a better balance here.
But the HT side was why I bought it of course, hoping for a better balance here.