• 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

Mac vs the Japanese

bre's dad said:
I've got a mix of McIntosh, Marantz, Pioneer, Creek and other stuff both new & old. Mc gear has a sound in its own and Mc users will swear by it just like hard core Marantz or Sansui guys. Two pieces I listen to quite abit include a Marantz 2226B & Mac 1900 receiver. I think the Mac has a warmer tube like sound, though the Marantz looks cleaner, more modern and can't beat that classic blue dial. Not that its better, just different.

As far as preamps go, I've recently had a Denon PRA-1000 and McIntosh C26. The C26 had an overall smoother sound. The Denon had a much better phono stage and had an MC input where the C26 only can handle MM (which doesn't matter to me as I only have MM carts.) I ended up keeping the C26, but I wouldn't say it was better than the Denon. The Denon has a more neutral sound. The C26 looks way cooler in the dark too, as do most of the all glass faced McIntosh gear, but that's not why I kept it.

I also auditioned an Onkyo M504, Denon POA1500 and McIntosh MC2105. I passed on the Denon as it just sounded, well, blah. The McIntosh was too $$$ but sounded good. The winner? The Onkyo.

McIntosh is good stuff, but there is stuff out there that's as good for less. To me, its like having a Harley or a Corvette. There's stuff out there that is cheaper and will do just as good of a job if not better, but there's a certain clout that goes along with it if you're looking for that kind of thing.

There is one thing that is hard to beat with McIntosh: MADE IN USA
Click to expand...

Different reactions from different folks. I have owned a number of Macs and the only one I regret selling is the Mc240. For vintage ss I find the Sonys extraordinary. I have Radio Craftsmen 500A tube which is very good but just a notch below the Mc240. The 240 is tremendous especially with voice. The MC26 was just not my cup of tea. I preferred the Sony 6060F to the Mac 1700. I noticed you declared in favor of the Onkyo M504. Interesting. I had the bigger Denon 2400 and was not impressed.
A Mac always draw a crowd.
 
Someday I would love to get a McIntosh 1900 or a Mac tuner/amp combo, properly brought up to spec. There is just something about they way they look, feel and sound that draws me to them. Much in the same way I was drawn to Morgan +4's. Never got one of those either. I figure I probably have 10-15 years left on this earth, so hopefully there is still time.
 
Mac vs Japanese well I have owned Mac/Lux/Sansui/Pioneer/Sony/Marantz.
I now own and well never sell 2 systems of Accuphase
Now compare Mac to Accuphase flip a coin you you won't be disappointed either way. But I prfer my Accuphase to the Mac gear. Just my opinion
 
McIntosh is probably one of the finest sounding audio gear available. The problem is lot of times the new gear is beyond the reach of many people. So, many of us have bought used Macs. The issue is lot of the vintage stuff requires service, and therefore could sound rough at times. However, if the old stuff is serviced by some qualified repair shop, the units could sound very nice. In my experience some used Mac units such as the 1700s and few other SS units surrounding that vintage are not prohibitively expensive, and could sound wonderful!
 
Lots of good discussion and history related, here. Brian's experience is a cut above most members, if I can say so. Being a seller of vintage gear gives him a unique position. Thanks for sharing your experiences, Brian.

Richard seems to be on that quest to get the best sound and gear that his budget allows and is doing his due diligence before buying. I don't think he'd go wrong buying vintage Mc but the price and availability might weigh into choices, at some point.

I have a pretty good integrated, the Kenwood 500, but am thinking about buying Accuphase separates. I listened to them many years ago and vaguely remember the quality. Really, I have more sonic memory about whole systems than I do about a particular piece of gear. The Kenny does it for me now but I don't mind the upgrade path.
 
I've owned both, and a bit of Canadian and European as well.

The Japanese stuff is good, but there's just something about paying way too much for an American made product that feels so right. Probably why I still refuse to buy anything but American vehicles. My way of saying; "Yeah, your stuff is nice, but screw you anyways."

Don't ask me to explain that, just accept it as how I am.

Dave
 
The Kenwood 500,600 and the 700's share a pedigree with Accuphase's first Issue.
It would appear that because Kenwood didn't want to produce components of that level of quality(or better),the door was open for those Kenwood(and other Brand)engineers who wanted 'no-compromise' designs,to venture-out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuphase
 
Mcintosh in my opinion is one the best, it is exotic to some because it is expensive but hand built craftmanship is not cheap. You can still get new replacement parts for units over 40 years old, does any other brand do that . It may not be the brand for everyone. I also have a vintage pioneer receiver and the flagship Yamaha Rxv1 surround sound receiver from the year 2000 that are also very good, just not in the same league as Mcintosh. Vintage marantz is supposed to be better than the newer equipment, possibly because it is made in Asia now . Mcintosh is still made here in NY by the same people as before it was owned by the company that also owns marantz. Mcintosh not only sounds fantastic but the build quality is great. The amplifier's are big and heavy because of the quiet heavy duty transformers, not a cheap noise ridden switching power supply.
 
Brian said:
I'm not trying to convert anyone. Read what I said above. There are a lot of good units out there and for the difference in money between they and Mc, the Mc may not be worth it. If I can get 100% of what I want for $10,000 and 97% for $1,000 I'm not sure the $9,000 is worth spending for that 3%. I'm happily listening to the Sherwood S3300/S9500c pair on my Wharfedales and Heresys and enjoying it almost as much as the Mc system on the Bozaks. Not as good in absolute terms but just as enjoyable for me to listen to the Sherwoods go for about $100 and add about $300 for a complete refurb and the Wharfedales go for about $120 while the Mc system today is fetching about $2,000, plus a refurb is about 1,200 and the Bozaks about $800. Is the sound difference worth spending about $4,000 vs $520? For that difference I could upgrade the speakers to say a sept of Quad 989s or M-L CLS and have quite a bit of change left over and come even closer.

Yes, I recommend Mc to all but also Sony, Quad and Philips Laboratory and a number of other brands. Heck, I've even recommended a Radio Shack receiver to some, it just depends on budget, goals, associated equipment, music type and other factors. Oh, to prove it. Anyone thinking of a 1700, go get a STR6060FW, and have it gone through. For less money, just as good. If you don;t like it, go buy a 1700 and send me the 6060. I only have 3 and could use more.

In fact I'd wish far fewer would want the danged things and drive the price down so I could buy even more. I'd love the buyers' market for say the MC3500 to dry up so I could buy maybe enough for a HT and 2-channel stereo for say $120 each and maybe MPI-4s for $45, oh and MC225s for $10 like in the old days. Heck, I'd even settle for a half dozen mint condition MC2300s for $75 each.
Click to expand...


How did you come up with $1000 system sounding 97 % of a $10,000 system ? Maybe in your dreams. I recommend thay you go to a hifi store (not best buy or circuit city) and listen to some of the new hifi gear and you will reconsider . You get what you pay for . A 10 year old camero even if fully restored is not going to handle like a new porsche, not the same tight steering, not the same acceleration, not the same braking power. It will not have the same fit and finish in the interior, not the same bells and whistles ie no GPS, blue toothe, traction control etc. and the old camero will have rattles in it. It may be fast in a straight line 0-60 but that does not mean it is 97 % of the new porsche. You will notice below I have a Japanese turntable so I am not against Japanese hi fi gear.
 
Fine...you don't like 97% of the performance of a $10,000 unit for $1,000?

OK.

How about 90%? Or 85%?

Frankly, if I can get 80-85% of the performance of a $10,000 piece of equipment for $1,000, it is definitely on my radar screen.

Again - no knock on those who have the $$$ and want to spend it on what they believe to be the absolute best in quality. But to suggest that there is not a material flattening of the slope of the price/performance line as you get to the uber-high-end does not make sense to me....and while I may choose to spend that significantly higher scratch to get that last bit of performance in other areas, I am fine with the price/performance tradeoff that I have made in my audio system. I feel very comfortable with both the design of my Sansui AU-919 as well as the quality of the components that Glenn/EW put in it when he rebuilt it. Same my Punker X-modified TU-919.

Are there Mc units that are better? Probably.

Accuphase? I guess so.

Any number of modern boutique-build components? Yup.

But I feel like I have a pretty big chunk of the the performance abilities of those units at a material discount to the cost of those units...and I bet that there are a lot of Kenwood, Pioneer, Marantz and Yamaha owners who share a "pride of ownership" for that price/value tradeoff.

This is not to say that Mc owners should not be both happy and proud of their gear. But I guess that I am secure enough to admit that 1) I don't care much about whatever performance differences there may be between my AU-919/TU-919 versus a Mc setup, 2) I know enough about this stuff to know that what I have is pretty damn good, and 3) I really like what I hear from MY setup!
 
I have the Mac 6100 integrated and 1900 receiver, and used to have an MC240, C20, and MX 110. I have found happiness with an Accuphase E202. If you go with totally new, Accuphase has evolved into creating exquisite engineering jewels that, in my book, easily dust equivalent Mac pieces.

Of course, I can't afford either brand new, but Accuphase is definitely at the same level McIntosh was at in the early '70s, and is as good or better today. There are a lot of great Mac owners here, but I have met my share of Mac lovers in person who expect nonbelievers to bow and scrape at the altar.
 
2uberoller said:
How did you come up with $1000 system sounding 97 % of a $10,000 system ? Maybe in your dreams. I recommend thay you go to a hifi store (not best buy or circuit city) and listen to some of the new hifi gear and you will reconsider . You get what you pay for . A 10 year old camero even if fully restored is not going to handle like a new porsche, not the same tight steering, not the same acceleration, not the same braking power. It will not have the same fit and finish in the interior, not the same bells and whistles ie no GPS, blue toothe, traction control etc. and the old camero will have rattles in it. It may be fast in a straight line 0-60 but that does not mean it is 97 % of the new porsche. You will notice below I have a Japanese turntable so I am not against Japanese hi fi gear.
Click to expand...

Some truth there but I would submit that a $60,000 Porsche is definately 95 percent the car of say a a $250,000 Lamborgini or Maserati. Point is the fellow you were answering is right on. It's true- a lot of the so called "exotic" gear being sold at astronomical prices today does not perform that much better than well chosen gear that can be bought for a fraction. Yeah, you get what you pay for but then again- a lot of people are paying a LOT more than they actually need to.
 
sheltie dave said:
Of course, I can't afford either brand new, but Accuphase is definitely at the same level McIntosh was at in the early '70s, and is as good or better today. There are a lot of great Mac owners here, but I have met my share of Mac lovers in person who expect nonbelievers to bow and scrape at the altar.
Click to expand...

Bow and deliver obesience, infidel!
 
Elroy said:
Some truth there but I would submit that a $60,000 Porsche is definately 95 percent the car of say a a $250,000 Lamborgini or Maserati. Point is the fellow you were answering is right on. It's true- a lot of the so called "exotic" gear being sold at astronomical prices today does not perform that much better than well chosen gear that can be bought for a fraction. Yeah, you get what you pay for but a lot of people are paying a LOT more than they actually need to.
Click to expand...
I had a well respected teacher that told me, "Never get caught in an argument over an analogy" but I'm mighty curious.
How would you rate your Accuphase gear? I'm really not too interested in how it stacks up against other SS ethnicities, just curious as to how you like it. It might be a good choice for the OP, as well. Thanks.
 
westend said:
I had a well respected teacher that told me, "Never get caught in an argument over an analogy" but I'm mighty curious.
How would you rate your Accuphase gear? I'm really not too interested in how it stacks up against other SS ethnicities, just curious as to how you like it. It might be a good choice for the OP, as well. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I agree with using analogies but they do help to make points. ;) I expressed how I feel about my system on page 4 of this thread. I personally think Accuphase is the best thing since sliced bread! Problem is I there is no way I could afford the new Accuphase gear and I was VERY fortunate to acquire some pieces from the mid 90s because they are very rarely made available. It was a stretch for me to be able to buy them but I am SOOOO glad I did! To the point I was making in my previous entry- I have also acquired an AMAZING CD player which is just the perfect example of doing research and buying SMART and getting much more for your money. It is an ESound CD-E5 Signature Edition Prime (crazy name). It is a poster child example of some of the great gear coming out of CHINA these days (that's right I said CHINA)! Now you can go and spend $5,000 for an EXCELLENT CD player or you can buy this unit and smile all the way to the bank. :D
 
Comparisons depend on the criteria you are looking for. Example being, if you are listening to "just how long can this system resolve that shimmering cymbal among a multiplicity of sounds" until such cymbal becomes masked (this transfer function is a result of all of the equipment in the chain, amplifiers being a very important part of this) then, some equipment is better with this display where other equipment may "hang onto a bass note forever" as the program material suggests where other equipment, the legato bass tone may get lost in the combined signals.

As we move up the food chain, the 'better' equipment has more resolving power, a blacker canvas to layer the sound upon and does not need gimmickry to display sound that translates into emotion for the listener.

It all depends on what you are looking for in a sound system.

I remember a fellow that wanted me to come listen to his 'kick ass' system. I did not know what to expect but I was duly bombarded with harshness, noise, rumble, walls rattling, utter nasty and ugly sound and this is what that person thought was "great". On the other hand, I later brought him a set of Boston acoustics speakers to listen to that I feel were quite good at the time for him to learn "balance" and he called them "muddy and uninvolving" because he was used to his 6 way horn system.

Refinement comes with user wishes. One mans refinement could be a backwards slope for another person who wants "solid motor mounts on a 68 Camero" VS someone who recognizes and desires a balance of all of the parameters of sonic reproduction.

It is not elitism as much as it is acquired taste, expectations and maturity. Mature listeners tend to lean toward the more refined end of the scale. By mature, I mean experienced. "Taste" if you will.

As a teen, I had Klipschorns. I loved them and thought nothing could be better. Every time I hear them now, the woody mid bass, the hollow cavity of the midrange horn and the closed in and beamy high frequency response hits me in the head. Perhaps this is what I expect of them and perhaps since 35 years ago, I have moved on.
 
The major thing Mac had done.... Is..... Being in creditably consistent over the years with staying true to the "branding of its product". They have produced a very high quality product with excellent performance, no question.... Their golden years have lasted for 40 years for the most part....

Marantz on the other hand had higher points in quality/performance ( at least in my opinion IE the 10b, 8s, 9s, 7c...500s. ) and low points ( gold face box crap ....).... Marantz lost its way over the years....it has come back after a very dark period.

Credit to Mac for never losing its focus....

But this is a vintage SS forum... As I listen to a 10b, 7t and 500 driving a set of Ohm Fs ( all US made in the 60's & 70's ).... I will stay with my USA made vintage Blue SS power Meters from the other company that starts with an "M"... the noise floor is in China it is so low....

My acquired taste is in my vintage system... and it is as refined or more than any Mac from the same period.....

Don't get me wrong... I have been involved with electronics manufacturing on and off (mostly on) for 30 years now... I respect what Mac has done.... The completion was in some ways a lot tougher and in some ways easier back in the real vintage years ....



jk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom