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

Mac vs the Japanese

TejasRichard

TejasRichard

Babies taste of chicken..
was sitting here reading, and found myself wondering how mcintosh ss compared to similar vintage ss from the more familiar names. i've been reading in this forum for a while, and it just occured to me that i almost never see mac mentioned.i mean, i know mac has its own forum, but so does pioneer, and you get plenty of pioneer talk in here. anyways, i guess what i'm wondering is,now, 30+ years later, how does vintage mac stack up against yammie, marantz, pioneer et al. any takers?
 
Register to hide this ad
Good question, but I think it is a potentially polarizing one. When you read less about Mac in general forums such as VSS, I believe it may be because the Mac forum appears to be fairly self sufficient - i.e., that many posters there seem little reason to venture too much out outside their forum. And note that I do say that with all due respect!

Sorry, I don't have a direct answer for you other than that Mac equipment is perfectly capable of holding its own against most VSS equipment from Japan, and that their support is second to none.

Now, let the opinions commence.
 
I'm not sure about Mc buyers, new or used today but, years ago persons who were willing to part with the premium to purchase Mc did so as it simply reproduced a closer presentation than other brands and did not market hype. It had little advertising, did not join in the spec wars, would decline requests for review samples and relied more on word of mouth than any other form of marketing. The company did not for the most part cared less about what the other companies did than whether a part put in the unit was within design spec.

As a dealer we had 2 types of persons, those that came in for a stereo and those that came in and wanted a Mc setup. The latter usually came in after hearing a friend's system. Many were Doctors, Lawyers, university professors, actors, musicians and many other who usually attended live performances on numerous occasions. Yes, well heeled and usually above average earners but they also knew what sounded more closely to what their ears were attuned to. They did not need to justify or show off their systems. I'm not sure that this still is not the case.

Some of us do enjoy flirting with other brands and talking about equipment but more oft than not, we are get more excited about buying a good record than about buying a new interconnect.

FWIW, some decades ago I decided to quit equipment rolling and find a system to keep in place for life and after going through many pieces, models, brands and systems, I decided on a Mc system and it is still my main system save the power amp that I upgraded only to get the larger Mc of the same vintage. I was lucky in being able to audition more than probably most as I owned 4 stereo stores and anything I was not a dealer for I could just call the manufacturer's rep and ask him to send for evaluation.

If this sounds a bit snobbish, it is not meant to be. It is not much different than asking why a Rolls Royce owner is not discussing the Rolls on the auto site in the same way most talk of their GTOs, Corvettes, Malibus, Infinitis, etc.

Now, if you stroll over to the Mc group, you'll find them very passionate when it comes to Mc units amongst themselves. Oh, and yes they worry about tube rolling, what caps to use, if model A is better than model B but not as interested about whether brand x is better than Mc as they already know the answer to that in their eyes otherwise they'd own brand x.
 
I say this having only heard the Sony half of the equation (my Mac listening experience is only their current stuff), but I've heard it mentioned that in the late '60s Sony was trying to be a sort of McIntosh on a budget. I have a TA2000 preamp and a 6055 receiver that sound absolutely fantastic, and the build quality on the TA2000 is as superb as the sound. Who knows...Mc fans, I mean no offense by comparing them to Sony! Just making conversation...
 
Brian, very well put.

To really shorten this debate up, the McIntosh gear is going to outperform all but the very tiniest percentage of other gear. That tiny percentage will be it's equal, and I doubt very much that anything can top McIntosh in all-around performance, durability, beauty, value and prestige.

BTW, I've never owned a piece of McIntosh gear. Out of my league, I'm afraid.
 
I've got both sides of the equation as I own the STR6060FW and STR6120 receivers from that time period and used to sell the 6060 when it was in production. These early Sonys are indeed top rate and are voiced similarly to the Mc from that era as that was what Sony was trying to match. The 6060 construction is closer to Mc than any Japanese unit of the time or later and the 6120 featured things that other receivers then or later never matched with 1st rate construction. We used to sell the 6060 to persons wanting Mc but could not afford the tariff or had Mc but wanted something for the office, bedroom etc. and where they wanted the voicing but did not thin they needed a Mc system.

When I got the 6060 I plugged it into my main system and did not use or miss the Mc for about a year. No, not quite up to a Mc but I am on a quest to downsize but retain the enjoyment of the Mc system and the 6060 was the 1st receiver to acheive it without going to a Mc receiver. More recently I've found the Sherwood S3300 tuner and S9500c amp to be closer in meeting my goal but obviously not a receiver.

I've owned a STR 6065 longer than any other receiver and it is very good but compared to the 6060 and 6120 it is not close in build but, pretty good voicing. The TA2000 with the matching 5000 tuner and think it is the 3200 power amp makes for a very fine system and for the current pricing, you could do better with a Mc but, the benefit vs cost is questionable. It may be more of a benefit to take the cost difference and put it towards speakers, input sources, etc. to make a well balanced system.

Other systems can be just as satisfying as a Mc vintage and I've recommended them before such as the Quad 33 power amp with 33 preamp and FM3 tuner or for more power the 405 power amp. The later 34 and 44 preamps are also very good. Today, these can be very reasonable in the used market today. In fact if I were to start looking today and did not have a basement full of units I could easily settle on a Quad system.
 
hmmm....

This just adds more to think about. I am still in the process of putting together my first vintage system. I am also one of those people who does an inordinate amount of research into anything I buy (i think i spent 4-5 months researching TV's before I bought my plasma. I find it's usually easy to find the top of the heap, finding the best for the money is another matter). Unfortunately, a large part of the final decision making process, the hands on part, is not the easiest thing to accomplish w/ vintage gear. The best I've come up with so far, is to look out for people who like the same kind of music I do, and then check out what they play it through. Do you know how many of you bastids listen to 70's rock w/ a little blues, jazz and prog rock mixed in? I don't know an actual number, but it's a lot, let me tell you :D. And your systems are all so varried and enticing to look at, I don't even know where to start. I know, I know....the stuff is supposed to be cheap as dirt, and just as plentiful, but I simply can't afford to plop down $200+ dollars on a receiver that I may or may not care for. Nor do I want to be perpetually upgrading to the next best thing. And I guess, for me, at this time at least, there is no thrill in the chase. I can definetely see where others find that part of our hobby intriguing, and later on, with a larger budget, i fully intend to explore the possibilities. But for now, I just want to find a system that will allow me to get lost in the music, and stop thinking about what I should or shouldn't be hearing.

LOL. I just reread this post, and I come across a little like an indecisive penny-pincher, who rambles when he writes. I don't know about the first 2 adj., but I think i hafta claim the latter. Really, I'm not as much of a pinhead as I sound like. I think I need a beer....

rhb
 
Richard, not apologies needed as we've all been there. The first system sometimes can be the hardest.

I've always advised buyers to start with the speakers as they influence the sound of a system more than any other component. There are so many brands and designs. After finding some that meet your expectation then amp matching is easier then finding and amp and trying to match speakers. Finding a good 20 watt amp and then falling for a set of Bozak Concert Grands will negate the 20 watt amp. Likewise finding a deal on a 1,000 watt amp is overkill when you decide the right speakers are a set of Klipschorns.

The real name of the game is synergy, the matching of components that seem to be more than the sum of their parts.

As for music, I'm into jazz, classical, opera and chamber music plus a very small amount of classical rock.

Set a budget. You'll get many recommendations as to what to get. If the budget is restricted there are some things you can try. For instance if I were to suggest a budget system, I'd start with a set of The Smaller Advent speakers with refoaming and a Philips 787, 797, 7871 or 7971 receiver. The Philips units are all the same with different faceplates and either black or silver. These are later analog receivers of 60 watts into 8 ohms and though Philips did ot advertise the 4 ohm load it should be about 90 - 100 watts. The pair will set you back probably less than $100 and the speakers are well liked and those who have gotten the Philips Laboratory receivers like them. Philips also had smaller 45 and 30 watt units that are also very good but the cost savings is not that great. Sub something like a Marantz 2270 and you can spend some $300 more just for the receiver but will not realize better sound. You'd do better putting the money into say a double set of original Advent Loudspeakers with refoam stacking or if you like the sound, say a set of Klipsch Heresys, Fortes or Chorus speakers. But here is where if gets difficult. If you like the Klipsch, you'd do as well getting the smaller Philips as they need less power to get as loud as the Advents.

Confused yet? Do not feel bad it is one reason most of us here are nut cases.
 
Many/most ( not all ) of the highly regarded vintage Marantz units were US made either in NYC/Long Island or in CA.....

So its not just a Japanese question.....

In my limited opinion....having never own an Mac...but I have listened to them... I would not trade my Model 7t pre-amp or Model 500 amp for any system.....Mac or not.....

Vintage Model 10b tuner.....I don't think any vintage tuner can come close.

No question about it....Mac's are very nicely made and sound great...and are still constructed that way today. But the construction level of the 10b, 500 and 7t is just unbelievable....especially when you think about them being 40 years old....

I still lust after a pair of Model 9s......or a 7c.....(I know this is a solid state forum...)


johnk
 
I have always liked Mac gear.....in the mid seventies I listened to Mac and Accuphase....The Mac was sure beautiful with those big blue lights. I bought the Accuphases as I thought the Mac was a little more hi-fi sounding....but in 1989 I finally purchased my first and only Mac....a MR78 tuner....still have the Accuphase(s)(total recap) and my MR78. I have never regretted my decision.
 
Marantz receivers, tuners and integrated amps moved to Japan starting in 1968 or soon after. After Saul left the company had much of their units made by Standard Radio of Japan. A few units, principally the totl power amps sch as the 250 and 500 were made in the US while some other units were designed and spec'd in the US but made overseas.

Marantz and McIntosh during the tube era and very early SS period were direct competitors in the market. While a dedicated Mc lover, during the tube era I was firmly in the Marantz camp and Mc tube units were interesting but not for me. I agree that the US Marantz SS units such as the 20, 20b, 7T, 15, 16, 250, 500 and SLT plus the 18 and 19 carried on the Saul Marantz tradition of quality but Saul was onboard for all but the 250 and 500. Superscope showed it could produce 1st rate units, at least power amps but seemed to surrender to Mc the tuners and then the preamp pre-eminence. They did not maintain the quality. As Superscope let it start to slip and they were in the contract dispute with Sony, Sony seemed to decide it was going to make the move into the US as it was comfortable the contract with Superscope only the tape equipment. It also decided it was going to position itself above the other Japanese companies and push aside Marantz as the competition to McIntosh by have better products than Marantz, at least on the top end and here it succeeded at least in its earlier models. This was not the only company to make such a marketing move over the years. Later Accuphase decided to move into the McIntosh market and was classed as the Japanese McIntosh and later Lux decided to move in just below that top slot, similar to Sony and made some really good units.

John, the best power amps I ever owned without any doubt were the Marantz Model 9s. In triode mode they can really kick butt. The 7C set a standard and while today it may be a bit dated it still is one of the best. It is bettered by what I called the 2nd generation 7C, the Audio Research SP-3A1that is based off the 7C and improved the sonics but, the build quality is not as good. The 10B is a majority of one. Only real competition in terms of features is the Sequerra series of tuners but, that is to be understood as he developed both except for the audio stage of the 10b which he could not get quite right and it is also the weak point on the Sequerra tuners per those knowledgeable. The 20/20b were worthysuccessors to the 10b but never made the impact, possibly because by that time there were more tuners that were 1st rate such as the FM -1000 and TFM-1000 Fishers and 4310 Scott and MR71 McIntosh, a rather crowded field in the stratospheric market for tuners.
 
Probably a question better posed on the Mc board. Here, maybe the question could be how many would like to own a Mc unit? Of course, you could do a complete survey:
How many do not want to own a Mc unit?
How many have owned a Mc unit and sold it because they did not like it?
How many have owned a Mc unit and sold it for some reason other than not liking it?
How many have sold a Mc unit at a loss?
How many have sold a Mc unit at either break even or a profit?
 
i always wanted a Mcintosh, a friend inthe mid 70's had an all mac solid state unit blue meters, pre amp, tuner and i think 1mlc speakers. everyone of us were in awe..but i never saw the "deal" i needed to see to spring for Mc..stupid but there you have it.
 
TejasRichard said:
was sitting here reading, and found myself wondering how mcintosh ss compared to similar vintage ss from the more familiar names. i've been reading in this forum for a while, and it just occured to me that i almost never see mac mentioned.i mean, i know mac has its own forum, but so does pioneer, and you get plenty of pioneer talk in here. anyways, i guess what i'm wondering is,now, 30+ years later, how does vintage mac stack up against yammie, marantz, pioneer et al. any takers?
Click to expand...

In my oppinion the Mac guys are a tight knit crowd that only associate with the rest of us to convert us. Little do they know many of us can't afford it!!!!! JOKES ON THEM!!!!!:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom