My Second MAC: A 4100
- Thread starter vintagestereo
- Start date
Axcel
Accuphase all the way
Mac 4100
Over the last 3 years I have owned 2 Mac 4100's. Sold the first one to finance a project I was never overwhelmed with the Mac sound understand it is my humble opinion. As a kid I had always wanted to own a Mac so I decided to try another one. I bought the second about 1.5 years ago and really enjoyed the Mac. That was until I bought an Accuphase E 202 and then followed up with an Accuphase C200 & P300 sold the Mac. Long and short of it if your looking at Accuphase you will not be disappointed
vintagestereo said:
Over the last 3 years I have owned 2 Mac 4100's. Sold the first one to finance a project I was never overwhelmed with the Mac sound understand it is my humble opinion. As a kid I had always wanted to own a Mac so I decided to try another one. I bought the second about 1.5 years ago and really enjoyed the Mac. That was until I bought an Accuphase E 202 and then followed up with an Accuphase C200 & P300 sold the Mac. Long and short of it if your looking at Accuphase you will not be disappointed
Brad Muller
Super Member
The MAC 4100 sold for a couple thousand $$$$$ in 1980. It wasn't a cheap unit to purchase. It is the best of all worlds. Before I ever settled on seperates, I'd see if I could be happy with the 4100. For $500.00-$800, you could fall in love and never sink thousands of $$$$$ into seperates. The 4100 is probably the cleanest sounding underated 85WPC receiver I have ever heard. It also has quite a nice tuner. Someday, I'll own another one. Just my two cents worth.
Brad
Bradbarrynsue said:
That's certainly a possibility!
Brad Muller said:The MAC 4100 sold for a couple thousand $$$$$ in 1980. It wasn't a cheap unit to purchase. It is the best of all worlds. Before I ever settled on seperates, I'd see if I could be happy with the 4100. For $500.00-$800, you could fall in love and never sink thousands of $$$$$ into seperates. The 4100 is probably the cleanest sounding underated 85WPC receiver I have ever heard. It also has quite a nice tuner. Someday, I'll own another one. Just my two cents worth.
Brad -- Thanks for the encouraging words!
-- Chris
GeneT
New Member
Fed Ex Shiiping
The box is a well deserved precaution. Recently I purchased some small Boston VRS rear channel surrounds from Ebay. The packaging wasn't great but it wasn't bad either. FedEd dropped the package so hard it broke the crossovers loose inside the sealed and glued together boxes (both speakers). FedEx ended up paying for them but it wasn't the result I was hoping for when the purchase was made.
The box is a well deserved precaution. Recently I purchased some small Boston VRS rear channel surrounds from Ebay. The packaging wasn't great but it wasn't bad either. FedEd dropped the package so hard it broke the crossovers loose inside the sealed and glued together boxes (both speakers). FedEx ended up paying for them but it wasn't the result I was hoping for when the purchase was made.
Well, that day has finally arrived. It's at the local FedEx and I hope to pick it up later today. We'll see what we shall see...............
Sorry to say, this one's a "dead duck".......no sound from the amp. All the lights work and it tunes in stations fine...but, not sound....not even a hiss. I tried the jumpers in the rear without any luck. THIS IS SO DISAPPOINTING!!!! No signs of shipping damage........thanks to the MAC Box.
Anyway, I took the cheesy looking cabinet off and was rather disappointed with what I found inside. For 1984, this unit was archaic and reminded me of the Pioneer SX-1010 of amlost 10 years before. (In fairness, the 4100 first came out in 1978 and had an EXTREMELY LONG production run....1978 to 1985). Anyway, it does have a 5 Gange Tuner and the caps are decent for the 75 wpc rating. However, this MSRP'd for $1,999.00!!!! (More expensive when new that the contemporary SX-1980, 2600 and G-33000!)
But, admittedly, I have yet to hear it so I'll reserve judgement. This is the most I've spent for a vintage piece so far. I hope this is not a DISASTER!!!!
Anyway, I took the cheesy looking cabinet off and was rather disappointed with what I found inside. For 1984, this unit was archaic and reminded me of the Pioneer SX-1010 of amlost 10 years before. (In fairness, the 4100 first came out in 1978 and had an EXTREMELY LONG production run....1978 to 1985). Anyway, it does have a 5 Gange Tuner and the caps are decent for the 75 wpc rating. However, this MSRP'd for $1,999.00!!!! (More expensive when new that the contemporary SX-1980, 2600 and G-33000!)
But, admittedly, I have yet to hear it so I'll reserve judgement. This is the most I've spent for a vintage piece so far. I hope this is not a DISASTER!!!!
Attachments
wajobu
Boing Boom Tschak
Them Mcs can be quirky, as I have found with a C32 recently. Did you push in the Speaker 1 button? Sound at the headphones?
Kind of like flipping the Source switch on a CR-1000...and then...sound!
Post your issue in the McIntosh thread...perhaps Terry DeWick will pipe in.
Kind of like flipping the Source switch on a CR-1000...and then...sound!
Post your issue in the McIntosh thread...perhaps Terry DeWick will pipe in.
Brian said:
Brian -- Yeah, I wasn't too thrilled either. Unless this sounds absolutely INCREDIBLE, I just don't see how it could complete with the Japanese-sourced Receivers from the mid-80's. 2 Grand is an INSANE amount of money for what appears to be a rather conventional 75 wpc Receiver. I will say that in some respects the quality is slightly better.....but, I have to admit, I'm pretty disappointed with what I have so far. And the case.....vinyl on a $2000.00 Receiver????
Good Idea!!!
I'll do it right now.
wajobu said:
I'll do it right now.
Brian
An Old Geezer
If you think it is too conventional and wonder how it could compete againse the Japanese, look at a Rolls Royce sometime and try to figure out how it competes against say a Lexus or Lincoln. Then get in and drive it for a time and you'll figure it out. Likewise the Mc receivers are like a Rolls; look conventional but listen for some time and you'll understand. I am not as enamoured with the Mc receivers as their tuner/preamps and power amp combos and prefer the earlier units such as the 1900 but the 4100 still has the Mc magic. Admittedly for the price of the 4100 I'd rather kick in a couple of quid more and go for a Magnum MD208.
crooner
Tube Marantzed
Build quality appears to be pretty good for a Mac. The glass epoxy boards are top quality and not the cheap phenolic (paper based) PCB's found on most japanese mass produced electronics. The german ERO caps (green rectangular types) are nice touch as well.
The power transformer and caps appear small compared to the monster receivers, but the engineering was solid and I'm sure it meets or exceeds it's FTC power rating and IHF published specs.
Let's not forget that McIntosh's main business was separate components. Those looking for monster sized heatsinks, transformers and caps should look elsewhere...
The power transformer and caps appear small compared to the monster receivers, but the engineering was solid and I'm sure it meets or exceeds it's FTC power rating and IHF published specs.
Let's not forget that McIntosh's main business was separate components. Those looking for monster sized heatsinks, transformers and caps should look elsewhere...
Johncan
Record collector
Before I bought my Mac 4100, I had a Sansui 2000X, a Pioneer SX-1080, and a Marantz 2275. Needless to say, the only receiver of that bunch that I still have is the Mac 4100. It is that good.
Sorry yours is not working. Please check the fuses and the clean the jumpers with deoxit. The jumpers can be finicky.
John
Sorry yours is not working. Please check the fuses and the clean the jumpers with deoxit. The jumpers can be finicky.
John
pmsummer
simul justus et peccator
As some are aware, I love my 4100 (listening to it now spinning vinyl). My ONLY complaints are inter-related: the rack handles and the vinyl covered panels. I'm guessing McIntosh thought many if not most of their customers were going to either rack-mount or custom install in a cabinet (and rack handles were the "tail-fins" of the late '70s/early '80s). I'm guessing the panels were just an add-on based on experience from the Stereotech project.
WHEN you get her running right, I'd suggest you just pull the panels off. I did, and it looks much nicer, IMHO. I may someday try and veneer the panels myself, or buy those solid cherry wood ones that Audio Classics sells.
Good luck on her!
WHEN you get her running right, I'd suggest you just pull the panels off. I did, and it looks much nicer, IMHO. I may someday try and veneer the panels myself, or buy those solid cherry wood ones that Audio Classics sells.
Good luck on her!
pmsummer said:
If I ever get this thing to work properly, that hideous case will be the first thing to go. As for the rack handles, I rather like them, very solid and they'll make transporting this back and forth from the Tech so much easier.
Mystic
We're all born mad
pmsummer said:
I didn't like the 4100's handles at first, but over time I have come to admire them, so I guess they can grow on you. As for the vinyl siding, my unit is placed within a 1920s radio cabinet, so the vinyl exterior isn't easily visible & it isn't all that offensive. If the receiver were positioned in a more visible place, then I would consider recovering it with the soild cherry panels from AC. BTW, when I contacted Ryan a year or more ago about the real wood panels AC had cherry & walnut, guess walnut proved to be the popular choice as it appears to be no longer available. As for the "nude" shot of the 4100, it looks right to me; hell, remove the tuner apparatus and it looks a lot like the inside of my MA-6200. I see that the issue's been posted over at the McIntoch Forum. Good move, they'll be very helpful in determining the problem(s) with Chris' receiver.
