Mc preamps: why are there so many c28 and c32 compared to 29 out there

[twiiii]

I hate to say this but Mac was in trouble with the C-28. It had mechanical issues, electrical issues and of course the poor tracking volume control which showed up real fast when amps with meters came along. Davie told me about the C-29 at a clinic and I ordered one from Charlie Lucas on the spot. I got one of the first one hundred. I kept it over 30 years. The phono section was much better, the volume control was perfect. They got rid of all the C-28 controls on top that were a big head ache. Then came the C-30 with graphic tone controls and a line and headphone control. I should have switched but didn't. I didn't like the C-32. If not properly integrated with the power amp it tended to have a noisy over all performance with efficient speakers. A C-33 and 34 were a big improvement except in the phono stage for some reason. But unless I use my graphic controls the C-34 phono section is a little to euphonic for me and why I purchased a MP 100 a few months ago. Would you believe the phono section of my MX 151 gives the MP 100 a real run for its money. . The MP 100 allowed me to use MC and changed the timber or voicing of the phono section from the C-34. There were big jumps in prices from a C- 28 to a C-34 and C-37.over that period so I kept the C-29. Now that I have the C-34 that I bought 12 years ago to manage dubbing all my tapes using processors to CD was simple with the 34, something I couldn't do with the C-29 easily.

 

[62caddy]

Oddly enough I preferred the C32 to the C30 I had earlier but in all fairness it's difficult to A/B preamps in real time. This hobby of ours is a funny business...

 

[Searing75]

I hate to say this but Mac was in trouble with the C-28. It had mechanical issues, electrical issues and of course the poor tracking volume control which showed up real fast when amps with meters came along. Davie told me about the C-29 at a clinic and I ordered one from Charlie Lucas on the spot. I got one of the first one hundred. I kept it over 30 years. The phono section was much better, the volume control was perfect. They got rid of all the C-28 controls on top that were a big head ache. Then came the C-30 with graphic tone controls and a line and headphone control. I should have switched but didn't. I didn't like the C-32. If not properly integrated with the power amp it tended to have a noisy over all performance with efficient speakers. A C-33 and 34 were a big improvement except in the phono stage for some reason. But unless I use my graphic controls the C-34 phono section is a little to euphonic for me and why I purchased a MP 100 a few months ago. Would you believe the phono section of my MX 151 gives the MP 100 a real run for its money. . The MP 100 allowed me to use MC and changed the timber or voicing of the phono section from the C-34. There were big jumps in prices from a C- 28 to a C-34 and C-37.over that period so I kept the C-29. Now that I have the C-34 that I bought 12 years ago to manage dubbing all my tapes using processors to CD was simple with the 34, something I couldn't do with the C-29 easily.

Please explain what you mean exactly by the C32 needing to be “properly integrated with the power amp”?

 

[seacliffe301]

Please explain what you mean exactly by the C32 needing to be “properly integrated with the power amp”?

My first guess would be an improperly set input level control on a McIntosh power amp.

I didn't like the C-32. If not properly integrated with the power amp it tended to have a noisy over all performance with efficient speakers. A C-33 and 34 were a big improvement except in the phono stage for some reason.

I too am curious as to your findings regarding the C32. Back in the day, I upgraded my 5 year old C28 with a C32 and I found that to be a night & day difference in terms of the noise floor, particularly in the phono section. This improvement was probably the single most extreme example I've ever experienced between successive pieces of gear, meaning preamp to preamp, amp to amp, tuner to tuner.