• 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

MQ112 - finally!

I do agree that the variable loudness, loudness compensation that varies inversely with the Volume control is something that should never have been discontinued...

Just to clarify, the C-Var loudness controls that Mc used in the past beginning with the C32 operate independently of volume setting. Not like the system Yamaha used where one affected the other.
I just don’t get buying a new system with 1970 technology...

In design and purpose, the MQ112 is really a playback EQ despite how it's labeled. I don't think anybody is going to buy it with the expectation of it being a serious room correction tool.
 
Just to clarify, the C-Var loudness controls that Mc used in the past beginning with the C32 operate independently of volume setting. Not like the system Yamaha used where one affected the other.


In design and purpose, the MQ112 is really a playback EQ despite how it's labeled. I don't think anybody is going to buy it with the expectation of it being a serious room correction tool.
True, the later preamps' variable loudness was not connected to the Volume (pot) and had to be varied manually, but still better than a simple on/off (such as one would program into a DSP) or none at all.

I know, separates are what many prefer, but I would strongly prefer a preamp with a built-in DSP (integral MEN-220), a loudness-compensation curve preset in that DSP, of course if you have a DSP you also might as well put the D/A converter in there, streaming, at least one Phono preamp, skip the meters and fiddly knobs and a proper app for control of my music from my tablet or phone in addition to a remote (hopefully an all-in-one for all McIntosh gear). As a playback EQ that too can be programmed into a DSP, one I use has many inputs and outputs so that a phono input (for example) or tape input, or tuner, can each be EQ'ed as a separate device on its way to the preamp, or each can simply have its own program that I can select from my tablet when I switch source.

I do get it that many people like the multiple pieces of discreet equipment, with many gleaming knobs and backlit lettering, people like glowing tube filaments behind glass, getting up every 20 minutes to flip and clean their LPs, much like the "butt for every seat" auto-industry motto McIntosh wouldn't build these devices if their Marketing Department hadn't identified the buyers, their price threshold, the features and performance expected etc. to make it worth the development cost. Much like the quote I've read multiple times about why McIntosh still builds tube gear: because people still buy it. You don't have to leave the AK forums to find those who are restoring and using 8-Track players either, we all have enjoyment of our systems beyond the science and technology of 2023 and that is part of the beauty and diversity of this hobby, ... my original point still stands as "I don't understand", I don't get it, but since many many others do there is obviously something to it (and money to be made).
 
Last edited:
Finally something brand new from Mcintosh that I can afford but more than likely would never use. I have a c33 and a 4100 with their built in eq's and variable loudness but I choose not to adjust them. No doubt the same thing would happen to a 112 if it was here.
 
Back when the C50 was in production (2010-2015), I was speaking with another Mac engineer in Binghamton who told me that they had finally “resolved” the perfect EQ spectrum (in number of controls and their frequency) with that C50 model’s eight (“no more, no less”) knobs.

Looks like they’re still tweaking…

I used to have variable loudness on my older Mac preamps, which I used on occasion. Miss it on my C22 IV. Every time I engage the 22’s loudness switch, it’s too much bass, even at low volume. But I generally go flat.

If I had the $, I’d first get a MEN220. I guess if I had another $3K lying around, I might add the MQ112. I bet Mac will sell them to all those people lining up for the C1200–just rave-reviewed (“I bought the review sample.”) in the November ‘23 Stereophile.

I still don’t know why they didn’t go with concentric L & R channel knobs; and also why they didn’t add the expander from the C32 era. My brother is very happy with his C1100. He said “hard pass” on the MQ112.
 
Last edited:
As a playback EQ that too can be programmed into a DSP, one I use has many inputs and outputs so that a phono input (for example) or tape input, or tuner, can each be EQ'ed as a separate device on its way to the preamp, or each can simply have its own program that I can select from my tablet when I switch source.
As true as that may be, there will be always be those old school audiophiles who want the ability to make tonal changes on the fly. I think there will always be a market for equipment that caters to that.
 
For a while now I have wished that McIntosh offered a MAC8950 kind of receiver. Like an MA8950 with a tuner. MAC7200 + DA2 + MQ112? Hmm...

I wonder if that MQ112 could support the (75 lb) weight of a MAC7200 sitting on it.
 
I got a spot for it ! That puppy will go between my MX136 Front L+R and the MC207 channels. That way I can listen to my Stereo sound vs my kids home theater stuff.
IMG_9653 copy.jpeg
 
What it needs is remote mics that reads room frequencies and decibels, so you don’t have to rely on phone apps to set it up correctly. 3 large for what we used to get for about $100, with all those lights for extra bling appeal. Oh how silly of me, the Mac logo is selling for a couple grand all by itself.
 
What it needs is remote mics that reads room frequencies and decibels, so you don’t have to rely on phone apps to set it up correctly. 3 large for what we used to get for about $100, with all those lights for extra bling appeal. Oh how silly of me, the Mac logo is selling for a couple grand all by itself.
This would be one of those products which you simply would not want to remove the top cover . . .
 
Back
Top Bottom