Mac vs the Japanese

[TejasRichard]

a yamaha c-80 pre and m-70 amp! SO far, so good....very, very good, lol!

Still want to pick up a Mac pre, sometime in the future, but right now my funds have other obligations....

 

[MOPAR3]

I was running a C-80 and M-65 and was very happy with it. I wanted a pre with a remote and decided if I was gonna spend more money I would do it right. Instead of spending and upgrading again and again. The old Mac C35 that I could afford definitly took My system to the next level. After hearing how different it sounded I had to have an amp with to match. So I ended up with a used amp from the local dealer for a very good price.

 

[godzilla]

MAC 1700 vs. Sansui Receiver Seven

I own both of these receivers. The MAC is 40W/ch. and the Sansui I do believe is 47W/ch. I've owend the MAC for 15 years now, but I've only owned the Sansui for a week. I've been doing a back and forth since last night to notice the differences. I have them playing through a SONY 3AXES CD Player and Klipsch KLF-20s. The MAC sounds warmer, has better low end and solid mids and highs. The Sansui has decent punch, but has brighter mids and highs. I have to turn the Bass on the Sui to +6 to match the MAC zeroed out. I'd have to say the build quality goes to the MAC, but the Sansui's aluminum machining is just as nice or better. I like the MAC's Walnut case better though, the Sui's almost looks like vinyl, but it's not.

The MAC has always made me happy with the sound it produces. I use to live in a house with a 17'x23'x9' Livingroom that had plaster walls, hard wood floors and coved ceilings....MY GOD did the MAC sound HUGE in that room...I couldn't help but to turn it up every chance I got.

I was surprised by the Sansui when I first hooked it to my Klipsch. It does have some Mmmph! I've played all types of music through it. I've put the spurs to it a few times with some Sabbath and Zeppelin...it sounded GREAT! Things that impressed me with the Sui are the number of inputs...the ass end looks ike a modern receiver. Six speaker outputs also...very nice. The weight of the thing...definitely SOLID! MINTY and all for only $70.

 

[vapcochris4]

My Spec 2 took the title that Dynaco ST-70 amps had in the early 60's as the "poor mans Mac." I can't make a direct comparison to amps like the MC 2300, similar to the Spec, I would think; but my Pionner kicks ass!

 

[twiiii]

Over the years we sold Marantz, Sansui, Kenwood, Pioneer, Yamaha, Nakamichi, Technics, Akai, Sony, Misubishi, Pioneer Elite, Stax, Signet, Panasonic, TAD, . Personally I liked Sansui, Pioneer and some early Pioneer and Pioneer Elite. My main problem was they all were always in the shop being fixed and as we were near a big Military base, we saw all the stuff the soldiers brought back, too that wasn't warranted. So I am not a big fan of Jap products. Having a Mac in the shop was a rare adventure. Couple of stuck VU meters, power transformer for 2105, Mc3500 bias updates, C-20 power supply issues. C-28's and MX-110 with bad volume controls and intermittant input and mode selectors. MR 67 and 71 with alignment issues. The newer Macs of the 70's were never in the shop unless used in dirty environments. 80's Macs were even more trouble free.

Sound wise I couldn't stand Kenwood, Yamaha, Akai and Nakamichi. Kerocerra and some models of Pioneer were rather good and Sansui was very listenable, but I would n't give up my Mac unless I wanted to up grade to another Mac. I got stuck in a rut for a while but even got more entrenched with Mac in the 2008 to 13 period when I updated every thing. If I had a bunch of money to spend I would even add more and not consider anything oriental. When it comes to speakers I can't stand oriental sound. Turn tables, Nakamichi Cassette machines, and Dynavector phono cartridges are a different story. Dynavector has a very smooth detailed sound, that reminds me of my older Ortofons, but can track better. I currently run Thorens TT but will up date to a VPI some day. Head phones or ear speakers are Stax and Sennheiser, but Stax is much preferred.

I have heard Accuphase is superb, but have not auditioned any units. Older Marantz tube stuff could be a little forward, especially the 7C, and the 9 was a real piece of art. But a 3500 blew away everything else tube and most SS of the time away, so Marantz was always second fiddle. Its always been very important to me that my stuff work from day to day and year to year. Repair costs are painful to the budget, and the last thing I want is my system down and out.

 

[swamppirate]

I own both of these receivers. The MAC is 40W/ch. and the Sansui I do believe is 47W/ch. I've owend the MAC for 15 years now, but I've only owned the Sansui for a week. I've been doing a back and forth since last night to notice the differences. I have them playing through a SONY 3AXES CD Player and Klipsch KLF-20s. The MAC sounds warmer, has better low end and solid mids and highs. The Sansui has decent punch, but has brighter mids and highs. I have to turn the Bass on the Sui to +6 to match the MAC zeroed out. I'd have to say the build quality goes to the MAC, but the Sansui's aluminum machining is just as nice or better. I like the MAC's Walnut case better though, the Sui's almost looks like vinyl, but it's not.

The MAC has always made me happy with the sound it produces. I use to live in a house with a 17'x23'x9' Livingroom that had plaster walls, hard wood floors and coved ceilings....MY GOD did the MAC sound HUGE in that room...I couldn't help but to turn it up every chance I got.

I was surprised by the Sansui when I first hooked it to my Klipsch. It does have some Mmmph! I've played all types of music through it. I've put the spurs to it a few times with some Sabbath and Zeppelin...it sounded GREAT! Things that impressed me with the Sui are the number of inputs...the ass end looks ike a modern receiver. Six speaker outputs also...very nice. The weight of the thing...definitely SOLID! MINTY and all for only $70.

That Seven looks ALOT like my 5500. Which, I am very impressed with.

 

[Rex Aeterna]

I always see McIntosh and marantz praised and mention all the time around me...I personally though rather have H/K 775 mono blocks and matching h/k 725 preamp to any McIntosh or marantz of that era but, that's just me.

 

[Mark B]

I always see McIntosh and marantz praised and mention all the time around me...I personally though rather have H/K 775 mono blocks and matching h/k 725 preamp to any McIntosh or marantz of that era but, that's just me.

H/K 775 mono blocks are great amps. Same circuit design as the Citation XX. A friend is running 4 of them on a pair of Quantum 3's. They do require regular maintenance to keep them stable.

 

[Nat]

I've read through the entire thread, and noticed that Mac speakers have not been mentioned once. I think that's significant, since they made quite a few, and they weren't inexpensive or poorly built. Clearly the name is not magical, as some would have hoi polloi believe. Some Mac products are outstanding, and most are very, very good, but they should be, given the deliberate care they take (or used to) before introducing a new product, and the markup in price that is given for their products.
I've owned a Mac C22, a lovely preamp and one of the very few pieces of audio equipment that my wife has really liked, (and she has been subjected to hundreds of them), their smallest tube amps of the C22 era, a pair of the speakers that actually should have had the audio compensator (which were okay) and recently an MX 112 in really dismal cosmetic condition.
The C22 was everything a top of the line piece should be -- satisfying to hear, look at and use. The amps were probably not ideal for my system at the time (IMF TLS 50s, I think) and were nice. I've been pleasantly surprised by the ugly MX 112 which has got me thinking of springing for a new face plate and a rebuild even though I am cheap cheap cheap and get a surprising amount of my gear at the dump.
I like the fullness of the Mac sound, but I'm not sure there is any thing mystical about it. It isn't quite the same as simply a bass boost, but I think it can be compensated for by choice of speakers. In terms of build quality, I think many japanese companies are fully Mac's equal -- Sansui in particular (especially their tube separates, but even the 9090). And the fact of people still using 50s and 60s equipment from all sorts of companies with no problems suggests that one can overstate the importance or uniqueness of Mac's build quality.
The claim that you can't have a correct opinion unless you buy Mac and take it home and live with it is just as convincing as that of the Peter Belt and other subjectivist crowd of the 80s and 90s who wanted us to believe that only by actually buying the aluminum sheets, magical liquids, bricks, alarm clocks, and cable standoffs and so on and actually using them could we judge them.
For those who have pots of money, and like Mac's sound, it's difficult to beat. For those with different tastes or smaller wallets, there are plenty of good alternatives. Maybe not the bragging rights, but I find crowing about how little I paid to be just as annoying to the audience as bragging about how much I paid, or how golden my ears are, or whatever arcane thing we can find to run our mouths about.

 

[damacman]

I haven't read the whole thread . . . just this page. I'll agree that Mc speakers were really never given their due as well. We've chatted about this in the Mc forum but it's all conjecture at this time.

Over the years, I've had very few pair of Mc speakers - (2) pair of XR5 and one pair of XRT-22s. I bought the XR5s to flip so didn't live with either pair very long. I do remember being pleasantly surprised by what I heard with them though. The XRT-22s . . . now that's a whole different story. Prior to owning them, my Altecs served me for 20+ years and I enjoyed every moment. Today, the XRT-22s are front and center in my listening space and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

As for the electronics vs. electronics question, I'll assume that's been covered extensively elsewhere in this thread. Contrary to popular belief, us Mc owners often do own and listen to other brands of gear. IE - I found a Sansui AU / TU 217 at the dump and rescued it. Today those pieces make up my garage system and they sound great through Mission bookshelves. I also own a Kenwood KT-8300 which I think gives my MR75 a run for the money at about 1/4 the cost.

 

[analog addict]

I've owned/still own a number of Mc pieces, but have never been completely blown away by their sound. I have a bunch of the middle 60's top end SONY gear which was supposed to be competitive with the early ss Mc pieces. One of these days, I'd like to get them fully up to spec and see what they sound like.....

 

[damacman]

OOC, Which Mc pieces do you own?

 

[analog addict]

MC-75 x 2, MX-110 x 2, MAC 1500, and not too long ago, sold my MC-225. Also used to own a MR-71. Never any solid state, although I've listened to a 4100, and it sounded reasonable enough...
I used to run the 225 on my Khorns, and it didn't do it for me any more than a number of other amps. That being said, it seems I'm partial to SET amps these days, although I do listen to the 1500 at least once a week.
That's currently driving OB Altec 604-8Gs...

 

[Tom Brennan]

Younger people around here should be aware that in the 70s many audiophiles didn't think much of either mass market Japanese SS or Mac SS gear and gravitated towards Audio Research, GAS, 2nd generation Dynaco SS, Quad, Paoli and other things. Crown and Phase Linear were popular too, though now many would deny it. ;-) IME the Japanese gear held in highest regard was Accuphase, Luxman and some Sony. I'm talking about electronics, not tape machines and record players.

Mac was often respected for build quality and appearance but considered sonically 2nd shelf. Many audiophiles considered their speakers high on appearance and not so high on sound, and intended for those who wanted an all Mac system.

 

[damacman]

Interesting perspective. I was 14 in 1979 so was pretty unplugged.

 

[Nat]

One thing Mac had that no other company did (at least that I know of) was the Mac clinic where they would test any amp or receiver for free and give you a power output and distortion graph. If you brought in a Mac, they'd bring up to spec on the spot, including replacing tubes -- they smashed the defective ones, which was very exciting to watch. Don't know if the replacement tubes were free, but they might have been.
That was a real reason to buy Mac stuff, but apart from a period in the 90s where they did it, I don't think they still offer clinics.

 

[SoCal Sam]

I always see McIntosh and marantz praised and mention all the time around me...I personally though rather have H/K 775 mono blocks and matching h/k 725 preamp to any McIntosh or marantz of that era but, that's just me.

H/K 775 mono blocks are great amps. Same circuit design as the Citation XX. A friend is running 4 of them on a pair of Quantum 3's. They do require regular maintenance to keep them stable.

Super sleeper amps. They pass near perfect square waves. I've played them on NS-1000M's and they passed with flying colors.

 

[shelly_d]

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!!!!!

I used to be a Mac wannabe but could not afford it. Now I'm a Mac guy. Fell in love with them in the early 1970's, in my 20's. Finally managed to scrape together enough to get my first Mac last September. Spent from then to last June putting it back together and correcting the mistakes I made doing it. Despite the damage the unit came to me with it still cost more then anything else I ever purchased for my system. I am NOT sorry. I love how clear this can sound when the source material is up to it.

What I have had in the past:

I started with Eico

Moved on to Dynaco preamp (PAT5) and HK Citation 12.

Since then I've had a modded Stereo 70, Stereo 400, Nakamichi PA-304 with first a DIY power supply followed by a high current Dell computer power supply.

As good as I thought the PAT5 was/is, the Mac blows it away. I do think the Nakamichi is the equal of the power amp section of the McIntosh. I do not say that lightly.

Having said all that, this is not night and day differences. I am will into the realm of diminishing returns, but now that I have my Mac, I am not going away. No way.

Shelly_D

 

[Phototone]

I am am amused at all the opinions. I am a classic Mac guy, but I have plenty of other options too. When I change out my preamp and power amp for anything else, I keep coming back to Mac. Just from a listening standpoint. In addition, the larger Mac solid state amps are the only ones that I am aware of that have autotransformer outputs, and this may contribute to the signature sound.

 

[theophile]

I am am amused at all the opinions. I am a classic Mac guy, but I have plenty of other options too. When I change out my preamp and power amp for anything else, I keep coming back to Mac. Just from a listening standpoint. In addition, the larger Mac solid state amps are the only ones that I am aware of that have autotransformer outputs, and this may contribute to the signature sound.

I think that both the Sansui BA 5000 and the Onkyo Grand Integra M510 power amps both use output transformers. Undoubtedly inspired by Macintosh.