• 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

McIntosh MA5100 Owners?

jdwdmi

jdwdmi

Active Member
Assuming the MA5100 is operating to spec how is the floor noise on the amp? My speakers are really sensitive and I don’t want to hear any noise. I’ve had problems in the past with amps that I can’t really hear noise on certain speakers, but with these speakers there is loud hiss.

The 5100 can be had pretty cheap and I have one local I could pick up. I’ve read it’s a musical sweet sounding piece. Kicking the idea between the 5100 or the 6200. The 6200 is quite a bit more in general.

Also the speaker inputs on the 5100 look like a pain. Anyway to accommodate this? Like the barrier strips on my 2105.

Lastly is there anyway to hook up a sub using low level inputs?

Thanks for any help or insight.
 
Register to hide this ad
MA6200 is significantly quieter than the MA5100, more powerful, more advanced, has greater flexibility, full glass front panel - all of which are reflected in the price. Still has the clip speaker connectors though. I think it's far less likely the unit you'll "grow out of".

For low level connections to the sub inputs you'll need something along the lines of this (x2) + the appropriate IC cables.

g703M22FRHD-F.jpeg
 
BTW - A MAC4100 receiver is just as good and a bit less expensive than the MA6200 on average, plus get a free MR75 tuner. That's the model I would choose unless enamored of the traditional Mc black glass look.
 
I do not think you can get closer to a Mac tube unit than the first generation Mac SS units.

You would have to believe the designing engineers upon seeing the improved performance specs on their test gear racing home with their prototype designs to evaluate vs their tried and true tube gear.

They had to be like kids at Christmas....I saw this with Gow when he and I opened up the first 5 prototype McIntosh MC cartridges, they may be engineers but the "wonder" was still there.

That said they have some handicaps that are much more apparent now than back in the day with noisier sources with limited bandwidth.

You can do a "lite" restoration or a full boat restoration....just takes time which means money. Then again all these 40+ year old units need some restoration work to get them back to what they were when new.
 
Thanks for the info guys. I was leaning towards the 6200 for all the reasons you stated Caddy. I don’t mind the look of the 4100 at all, I have no need for the tuner but if the price was right. I don’t think I’ve read a bad thing about the 6200.

For some reason I am drawn to the 5100, but the possibility of it being noisy and PITA inputs, I’m not sure. That being said for the price I could pick one up I could have my tech go through it. I think it would pair well with my speakers from that era.

A quick google search I found this adapter.
https://www.amazon.com/slp/speaker-wire-to-subwoofer-adapter/xdd52o7w5dd39sf
I wonder if this would work?

Those adapters you posted Caddy are two female to one male? Then it would plug into where on the amp?
 
c_dk said:
I do not think you can get closer to a Mac tube unit than the first generation Mac SS units.

You would have to believe the designing engineers upon seeing the improved performance specs on their test gear racing home with their prototype designs to evaluate vs their tried and true tube gear.

They had to be like kids at Christmas....I saw this with Gow when he and I opened up the first 5 prototype McIntosh MC cartridges, they may be engineers but the "wonder" was still there.

That said they have some handicaps that are much more apparent now than back in the day with noisier sources with limited bandwidth.

You can do a "lite" restoration or a full boat restoration....just takes time which means money. Then again all these
Click to expand...

I had my tech do a full boat restoration for me once, boy did that hurt. Good work and a good techs are not cheap. I am thankful though for people like him in my community. I just bought a new integrated, non Mac piece because I didn’t want the expense of maintaining vintage gear.

A week later I’m ready to send it back and buy a vintage McIntosh integrated. I suppose once you go Mac you can’t go Back.

McIntosh just does it right in my opinion. So musical, it just has so much soul compared to the new integrated I bought.
 
Last edited:
The splitter would be connected at the PREAMP OUT jacks of the MA6200/MAC4100 - thus providing two pairs of outputs for each channel.

One set of regular IC cables would be needed connect the preamp outputs to back into the MAIN AMP inputs of the 6200/4100 and then the others would be used to make connections to the subwoofer(s) using RCA cables of the length needed.

If quietness is the main concern, the MA6200/MAC4100 would be the way to go which either of which are 15 dB quieter S/N than the MA5100, not to mention the many other refinements. 15 dB is a significant difference.
 
Last edited:
The MC2505 was my first Mac piece I bought when I was 18 and so I have always had a bit of a soft spot for the early SS units even though I have been surrounded by all the new shiny mac toys over the last 4 decades.

That probably fueled my time invested in cleaning up some of the early units PS shortcomings as well as exploring other options to bring the performance up a notch or two.

I guess the old timey look turns many off, hence all the KNOB changing:):) but it is a classic look.

I do admit to trying to capture some of the "wonder" of discovery they must have felt as I am sure many here in this forum can to relate to in their own ares of expertise.
 
My 5100 is extremely quiet, I couldn’t be happier with it. I was marveling just two days ago how quiet the phono stage is. I’m running a Ortofon black 2m via phono 2 and a Denon 103 via phono 1. It is dead quiet with both.

Fact is, only thing not quiet about the 5100 is the headphone output. This is source agnostic with my headphones.

I didn’t find the speaker connection too much of a pain either. I would like the capability of the 6100 or the 6200 to drive a second set of speakers, but ultimately that wasn’t a deal breaker.

I purchased my 5100 out of convenience having Tom Manley and Terry DeWick here in tow and Tom having it in stock, but it also fit where I needed it to go (literally).
 
Glad to hear yours is serving you well, I would love to hear one. It would sure be nice to be close to Terry or Audio Classics.

I never have took the plunge into vinyl. All digital here.

My speakers are 103db and are sensitive to any noise in the amp. It would be very disappointing to buy one and hear noise in the background while playing music. For that reason alone I’m thinking I will steer towards the 6200, as Caddy pointed out is 15db’s quieter.
 
If you listen to LP's then the quieter the pre-amp the better. Back at that time Mac recommended Ortofon MC cartridges with SUT's as they had the ability to have a between 6 to 8 db more output than MM cartridges. Some of which with lower outputs revealed the poor signal to noise of the MA 230 and MA 5100. Remember Mac used to rate their pre-amps ref to 10 mv, where now days it can be referenced to 2.5 to 5 mv. Each are a 6 db step. So if you use a 2.5 mv cart you loose 12 db of signal to noise over a 10 MV cartridge. 12 db is a big difference. I can remember when we used standard tape we were lucky to get 55 db s/n below +6 db on the VU meter or 3 % distortion at 400 HZ. . Which means if you were listening at average levels of -10 db you only had 40 db signal to noise and you could easily hear the tape hiss and electronic noises of the tubes. With the advent of high out put low noise tapes and using AME equalization we could easily get 72 db signal to noise which meant 57 db below -10 db levels, which was a great improvement. By the 80's with DBX noise reduction we had over 100 db signal to noise ratio giving us analog sound with low distortion of digital recordings. I preferred DBX at the time.
 
I ended up with a 6200 but it is missing the jumpers.

Any suggestions on where to source them or an aftermarket solution?
 
I’m not looking to open the whole interconnect debate, just curious what some have used.

I will look for the shortest ones possible and start there I suppose.
 
jdwdmi said:
I’m not looking to open the whole interconnect debate...
Click to expand...

Just offering a quick solution to help get your amplifier working in case you were unaware whether conventional IC would work in this situation.

Congratulations on your MA6200 purchase and good luck with it.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Caddy and I appreciate your input! You are always willing to help. It will be a few weeks before I receive it. The seller agreed to buy a shipping box from Mcintosh and ship the walnut cabinet separately. Shipping will be delayed but glad it should arrive safe.

This is my secondary Mac system. My primary is a C47 and 2105. So if I get upgrade fever it will be a newer amplifier.

I need a short interconnect because the 6200 will be in a cabinet and not much dead space behind for extra cabling. What do think about something like this?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1-Set-of-K...m=163602673018&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851
 
Well the length isn't all that critical since there will be other cables hanging out the back anyway.

I personally wouldn't spend that much on IC cables but those should work fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom