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

MC152 or MC500?

H

halfpint

New Member
Hello, I've lurked on the forum for a long time and finally have a reason to post.
I have a pair of JBL 4343 speakers on the way and I need to buy an amp.

I'm trying to decide between a MC152 and a MC500 - does anyone have any advice?

The MC500 has more power, and a greater damping factor if that matters. I prefer its look but it is ~20 years older and much heavier.
The MC152 is much more recent. Lighter, but I'm assuming it has adequate power for my needs.

Thanks for any comments.
 
Register to hide this ad
I have both of these amplifiers. The MC500 is an amazing amp, powerful, smooth, articulate and I use it in my main system. It drives my Tannoy Churchill’s. I have a gold trim version. The MC152 is in my bedroom, and it’s really no comparison but in its own right another wonderful amplifier that punches way above its rated 150 watts. I previously bought it for a main system in a beach house driving Sonus Faber Venere S speakers. It’s no slouch, but not an MC500, the MC500 has muscle and weight as compared to the 152. Meaning, it will drive your system effortlessly. If you don’t need the power and all that it adds to your system the 152 would suit your needs. They are two different animals. Good luck.
 
Both are easily capable of driving your current speakers, but if you see more power-hungry speakers in your future, the MC500 would definitely be the better choice as long as it's running up to spec and you'll be able to move it around. More service might also be required.
 
The JBL are rated at 75W so I vote the MC152. I don't see a meter range switch on the 500 so it would be hard to see the meters dance with the JBL. Either way I don't think you can go wrong. Both have autoformers and powerguard.
What preamp?
 
I appreciate the comments so far, they've been fun to read.

As for the preamp - I'm hoping to be able to use a DJ mixer that I currently have. The model is "Lucia" by a company named Condesa. It's analog and sounds great to me.

I don't have a backup preamp in mind if that doesn't work.
 
I owned an MC152 a few years ago. It was a good amp and should be more than sufficient for those JBL speakers that are 93dB/1watt/1metter.

That said I could see where an MC500 would be considered by most people to be a - forever amp.
 
Get the MC500 - - I also have Tannoy's and they don't need a lot of power to drive them. But once I switched to a 300 watt per channel amp (7300 then a 302) the difference was striking. The sound took on a fuller, rounder and more satisfying listen. And had a heft to it that my previous lower powered amps did not provide. Now I'm talking solid state versus a tube amp with the latter being a different animal. But, I have found for me that a tube preamp (I have a C2200) and solid state amp is a great match. So you might want to look at something like that down the road. Although I also have a C48 and that works very well with the 302. I'll sum it up like this...

I now drive cars that have 4 cylinder engines. They have enough power and are generally a good drive. But, you can feel the motor working. Compare that to my uncle's 69 Caddy Coupe DeVille with a 472 cubic inch V8. Gobs of smooth, authoritative power and torque to spare and a something you just can't get in a smaller engine. Not sure if that makes sense to you but it's the best way I can describe a lower powered amp (McIntosh or other) versus one that has power to spare. Which for me was 300 watts per channel. Though I wish I had bought a 452 instead. Good luck whichever way you go.
 
I really like @louisjames explanation. Funny how many of us use car analogies.

I know that I've driven speakers that are well matched to the rated output of my amplifiers, and I've driven the same speakers with significantly larger amplifiers and there is always a noticeable improvement.

Clearly there are formulae that can predict, based on the speaker sensitivity, listenening levels, and dynamics of the preferred music how much power will be adequate, but for some reason the formulas do not match the listening experience.

In my experience, a 500WPC amplifier will smoothly and easily drive what a 75WPC amplifier should easily drive, ... better.

Plus of course you have the opportunity to buy and try the vast majority of speakers on the planet, as you should have plenty of power available.
 
A MC 152 when tested by high fi news reported the amp put out over 220 watts and for efficient speakers thats a lot of power.

Now I have heard 500 stereo amps and yes they are smooth and that was one of the things some reviewers and dealers didn't like about Mac Century Series amps from that period when compared to MarK Levinson or Krell amps for instance and Accuphase in particular. 500's and 300's were the amps just before the Quad series amps. 352, 402, 501's, etc. Then the new thermal tracking outputs came along and I found the highs were just a bit less congested. But a lot of older males can't hear that difference. So if you are younger and haven't compromised your hearing you may find the 152 more revealing . The 152 will also be quieter with better signal to noise which may be important to you.

Now your speakers are only rated at 75 RMS watts and should be able to handle between 150 watt and 300 watt very short term peaks Meaning if your amps don't clip and the amps you choose have power guard then a MC 152 would be the perfect match. Speakers that old if damaged original parts maybe hard to find or very expensive. So I wouldn't consider the MC 500 and definitely choose a MC 152. If you want a smoother sound then a MC 1502 which uses tubes. Its basically two mono MC 275's on one chassis.

JBL speakers in this case are more of a point source monitor speaker. Which means listeing at shorter distances, 10 feet for instance. So that further reduces the need for the MC 500 and making the MC 152 the preferred choice.

If you are in a larger room with 15 to 20 foot listening distances then you need the next model up from JBL with the dual 15" woofers and then the 500 might be considered.
 
I’ve heard the 4343s with Threshold SA/1 monos and Levinson 26S preamp. Sounded wonderful!

How big is your room? Music preferences?How loud do you listen?

Personally, I would look for an amp and preamp. I’ve found that the right preamp will make all the difference in how long you linger in front of your speakers.

You’d certainly get more out of those speakers and either amp if you spent $500 on a preamp.

There is an Acurus RL11 with Ken Ealey mods or a Classe CP-35 over on US Audio Mart. Either would be a good place to start until you can restock the stereo kitty for something in the Mac family.

And, no, I don’t have any affiliation with either seller.

Good luck!
 
twiiii said:
JBL speakers in this case are more of a point source monitor speaker. Which means listeing at shorter distances, 10 feet for instance. So that further reduces the need for the MC 500 and making the MC 152 the preferred choice.
Click to expand...

First time I've seen a 4343 described as a "point source" LOL. It's anything but - it's a large format playback monitor for big studio spaces.

Either amp will be totally fine and you'll only miss the higher powered unit at ear bleeding levels. Save your back and your ears and get the smaller unit. First time you have to cart a 100lb beast out for maintenance, you'll wish you had gone with something smaller and newer.

And DO NOT overlook the preamp in the equation. Some of my largest sound quality leaps were caused by a preamp upgrade (with the C1000 being the most amazing). Those JBLs are going to tell you exactly what you have upstream, in very great detail. Feed them well.

jblnut
 
damacman said:
No problem. ;)
Click to expand...
That‘s some fun gear

louisjames said:
Compare that to my uncle's 69 Caddy Coupe DeVille with a 472 cubic inch V8. Gobs of smooth, authoritative power and torque to spare and a something you just can't get in a smaller engine. Not sure if that makes sense to you but it's the best way I can describe a lower powered amp (McIntosh or other) versus one that has power to spare.
Click to expand...
Makes sense to me - the ease was noticeable.

louisjames said:
How big is your room? Music preferences? How loud do you listen?
Click to expand...
Around 600sqft, 12ft ceilings. Apartment volume levels. Music preference would be funk/soul/rnb mainly.


Thanks again for all the comments. Sounds like either would work, which is great to hear.

There is one more thing I’m wondering. I’ve heard some people describe the sound of certain amps/speakers as coming out of “pitch black”, in terms of background noise. Any idea if either of these would fit that category?
 
Caddy makes great points that many of us know, but kind of ignore (or we couldn’t justify upgrades). That is the whole “black background” thing, there pretty much is no such thing.

In a recording studio, 25dBA is considered good, and I have read that a good recording microphone is around 15dBA of noise that it generates itself. Not much, but certainly not nothing or “black”. Same with concerts, I have never been to a concert of any type that didn’t have some air-handler sound, mechanical noises, even the people moving around in their seats and breathing is more noise than most modern audio systems’ idle noise level, ... we are well beyond the point where the amplifiers and preamps are quieter than the music that they are playing.

Both amplifiers are rated at -115dB of noise at rated output (unbalanced), so they are pretty equal there, same S/N or by specs, neither is quieter unbalanced. The newer 152 is -118 balanced, the 500 isn’t rated separately for balanced input, not sure if there is a difference there but it certainly wouldn’t be much.

Find one to listen to, or if you are concerned about weight or warranty, the 152 wins easily. I don’t consider my McIntosh amps to be portable so like a new refrigerator, I don’t worry about weight, seems pretty trivial.My main speakers weigh more than that and they don’t have handles, ... I wouldn’t trade them for bookshelf speakers just in case I want to move them frequently.

Buy audio for its audio qualities, leave portability concerns to luggage.
 
With vertical slot tweeter and the acoustical lense midrange and non directional woofer, you surely can't call it a directive speaker. It may not be an Altec 604E or a Tannoy GR 90, but it has wider dispersions than either coax and if you are far enough way where the driver emissions unite, then it is a point source type of speaker. Who would want a speaker that presents 3 different unblended sounds. If I wanted a true faithful monitor speaker I would want coherent Urei 813's or 811's. There was even the 815 with two supplemental 15 inch woofers allowing the speaker to reach below 30 HZ with a lot of output.
 
Another thought. Lets say both amps are putting out 25 watts. Which amp is queter at that level and by how much. The MC 500 puts 3.3 times the power with 115 db signal to noise. So 500 to 25 watts 13 db. So the MC 500 amp has a signal to noise ratio of 102 db at 25 watts. The MC 152 would have about 110.5 db signal to noise putting out 25 watts. That difference can be easily heard depending on how efficient your speakers are and where the noise is centered. Also remember Mac uses an A weighting which rolls off the bass below 300 hZ or so. So it depends even more so as to which amps has the quietest power suppy. That can only be determined by you auditioning the amps.

I preferred the old days when Signal to Noise was measured from 20 to 20,000 HZ. Going from flat to an A weighted curve can easily add 15+ db to the signal to noise ratio in some cases. making the amps actually 103 db for the MC 152 and 100 Db for the MC 500. But only auditioning will reveal the truth. My speakers are 3 db more efficient than your JBL and using MC 207's even with my ears up against the speaker grills I hear no hum and only very very faint hiss. They are rated at 112 or 113 db signal to noise below 200 watts.

Some times the noise we hear isn't from the amps. It could be from the pre-amps or the sources.

My stereo system uses XRT 28's with MC 830's. But the weak link is the MQ 107 EQ with less than 90 db signal to noise. But it was rated at full 20 to 20000 HZ back then. I don't hear a thing in this case either and thats with my old C-34 that was rated at 90 db but has measured 99 db full bandwidth. So the stereo system should be at an disadvantage, but its not. Like you auditioning helped me tremendously even if I had to have a long time friend do the auditioning for me as the amps and EQ were over 2000 miles away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom