Scotty, I need more power!

[kevzep]

It does no good to attempt to have a friendly conversation with him. He came into this thread, like he does many others, to exert his intellect and superiority. He also looks down on anyone that thinks anything made by McIntosh is HiFi.

@Mike Gibson ... it gets old.

Agreed Tony, its older than old, we don't need this elitist nonsense here....
This was a good thread....

I still stand by my first impressions of listening to a MC250, they must have been lightyears ahead of their time when they came out, a real game changer I would say.
Today they can stand next to some impressive and much more modern gear....

 

[E-Stat]

I don't know if this is a discussion about the MC2505, accoustat speakers, or just another time for EStat to parachute in and regal us with his prose...

TSmith was concerned about the added power driving his speakers. Having used that level of power with mine, I assured him that it was not. He has subsequently discovered that for himself.

One minor detail. The product - like the word acoustics is spelled with a single "c":



Acoustat had a good run from 1976 to the mid 90s when purchased by Fosgate. Unfortunately, they suffered corporate financial difficulties and killed the product.

 

[c_dk]

Guys, it is part of the industry that many of us had to put up with over the presumptuous press......

Those who worshiped at the gates of Seacliff, drank the koolaid, ate the brownies, and truly believed they were doing the industry good, while they set it back tremendously.

I used to subscribe to "la Amis du Vin", had to to keep up a converstation with Gow but I also remember going to Sam's discount liquors and wines in Chicago......now there was a learning experience.

I find it truly suprising the OP enjoyed using his MC2505 in a interim role and do believe he is now experiencing the next step in upgradeitus.......

 

[quartersaw]

Regardless the MC452 is here to stay and I put it in my signature.

Run the Mc452 stand alone. I think that you may be surprised

 

[E-Stat]

I find it harly suprising the OP enjoyed using his MC2505 in a interim role and do believe he is now experiencing the next step in upgradeitus...

Is he an "elitist" as Kevzep opines for posting observations concerning the difference he perceived in sound quality between that and the 452 in his system? Is that harly surprising?

"Everything is better, instruments, especially higher freq / percussion is more articulated, correct in timbre and more precisely placed in space."

 

[quartersaw]

Completely agree, I have a lot of listening yet to do and felt somewhat uncomfortable posting impressions too quickly.

I still need to checkout some classical and more Jazz stuff .



Shows that XRT22s are more efficient than the old beater 'stats. I'm sold on that class of McIntosh speakers although the logistics in getting such are daunting.

I took a few meter pix and this one is more representative. These are peak-hold pix, not average.

View attachment 1572204

The first few weeks of running my Mc452, the meters were frequently in this range, with some 900 watt peaks. The power guard lights were winking at me repeatedly. I was surprised that my speakers seemed to easily tolerate it, and further surprised that the amp was still drop dead clean in its response.
This days, I usually run the amp in 'Class A' mode, but if the mood arises, I'll 'drop the hammer'.

 

[quartersaw]

I always live with a new component for 30 days before making an official call. For the first few days, comparisons are inevitable. Then, you find yourself listening to a piece of music whilst reading the newspaper and being sucked into the performance. Far easier to be achieve when not being critical of performance.

Always good to see meters on Mc amps buried so far to the right. Try as I may, I've been unable to do that with my bridged MC2600s. When the needles get past the 60w marks (120w / amp when bridged), it's approaching crazy. But, it's sure nice to be able to let one's hair down on a piece of music that deserves to be played loudly.

Have fun!

My paired Mc2300 meters never made it past 'vertical'. At that point, it was already insane. (ask my wife)

 

[kevzep]

Is he an "elitist" as Kevzep opines for posting observations concerning the difference he perceived in sound quality between that and the 452 in his system? Is that harly surprising?

"Everything is better, instruments, especially higher freq / percussion is more articulated, correct in timbre and more precisely placed in space."

Go away, you are the most annoying person in this forum.

 

[E-Stat]

Go away, you are the most annoying person in this forum.

It seems content is unimportant.

 

[Mike Gibson]

Enough of this ****. Stick to the topic at hand. It's about a MC452. His decision to buy and subsequent impressions of it. That's it in a nutshell. If I want to read audio history I'll dredge up some old Stereofool mags from the 70's.

 

[E-Stat]

Enough of this ****. Stick to the topic at hand.

Indeed. Posts 76, 82, 84 and 89 are just personal attacks.

Kill the messenger - or at least one who quotes or (heaven forbid) agrees with the OP's observations.

 

[Mike Gibson]

Just had to have the last word eh?

 

[Mike Gibson]

Here's the deal. My computer is too slow to go back and clean up all the dreck in the last 3 pages of this thread. So I'm reopening in the hopes that it will stay civil. You co-operation is requested.

 

[kevzep]

The MC2505 is the best sounding amp I have owned up until the MC452. That means it beats Kenwood integrated, Pioneer integrated, Spectral Acoustic (junk), Dyna ST 70 & Mark III, Bryson 2B & 3B, ARC D52 SS, ARC D90B and D115 MK II, and MC275 IV.

If your 2105 was insipid, something was not working correctly.

My view is that with the MC452, you have entered a new realm of amplification, and maybe the pairing of what you had before was a good match for your speakers (tonally), but now you have an imbalance, the amplifier is lightyears ahead and could well be showing some limitations of the speakers you are using.
Its improved your sound, but now the speakers could be holding the MC452 back?
Food for thought?

 

[c_dk]

EStat I received your PM and I also PMed Mike to reopen this thread.

The contempt that I had for your mentor, the damage I believe he caused to the industry in his scheme to sell a magazine, foster controversy, and create a ongoing lineup of products to review to propagate this scheme was terrible.....approaching the payola scandals of the record companies, in my opinion. His, now your, condemnation of products from companies that would not participate in his scheme I found suspect as did many in the industry.

All that said:

To me personally having made as my first Mac purchase a Mc2505 way back in 1974 I find the OPs ongoing positive, but admittedly suprising to him, ongoing experience a feel good moment. I actually had to buy the amp while paying for my private college tuition by taking out a loan, and actually had to convince my Dad to cosign for me......not a car, a $500.00 amp.

I still have the amp, now on loan to a local along with my project C26, so he can do comparisons between them and the MX115 I just restored for him.

Finding and restoring some of these quality vintage units is what makes AK fun and interesting.

 

[E-Stat]

I also PMed Mike to reopen this thread.

As did I. Castrate the OP for presenting his quoted observations as you will.

His, now your, condemnation of products from companies that would not participate in his scheme I found suspect as did many in the industry.

His being the OP with his candid comments. Why aren't you attacking him for suggesting that audio quality has improved markedly over the past fifty two years?

Finding and restoring some of these quality vintage units is what makes AK fun and interesting.

Sure. That pursuit has nothing to do with ultimate sound quality.

Refer to to OP's comments as to the differences in sound quality over the past fifty years.

 

[c_dk]

I personally am going to celebrate with the OPs ongoing discoveries with his new to him amp, both in what a newer much larger amp can do and how good his 50 year old vintage unit really is.

I believe the OP is still enamored with how well his MC2505 has held up while realizing that new amps can offer improvement.

As per your mentor HP, who would have noticed or cared if he would have criticized Johnson's fledgling dynaco modifaction company, or a number of others........but criticize McIntosh and it's dealers still steeped in the tradition of the fair trade laws and then add to it their refusal to offer free samples, well now you can create some rag sales.

It was a great scheme to promote his balance sheet but hardly expanded the hands on knowledge base in the industry. Mostly provided lazy salespeople with more excuses complaining that a product did not get a blessing from Seacliff.

The knowledge base does not grow in some dealer showroom or reviewes auditioning room, it grows and expands in individuals home listening spaces....one on one.

This forum should give individuals insights into others new and ongoing experiences in their space.

 

[SaturationPt]

I believe that the vintage (2505) amp had a lovely sound, much as do my own vintage McIntosh both tube and SS.

I also believe that the modern amplifiers have more detail, certainly more power should bring more headroom, and if driving the bass cabinet for the Acoustat 1s then the additional damping should benefit the sound quality.

However, I also believe that each step into "perfect" removes more and more of the things that create that lovely sound for us. Even-order harmonics are measured as harmonic distortion just as odd harmonics are, yet the even harmonics are pleasant. As we remove the distortion we remove pleasant (additional) sounds.

It is easy to reject things that create impure sound: turntables have inherent out-of-phase crosstalk, creates that presence that makes music so real. Dipole speakers such as Acoustat, Magnepan, Martin-Logan and others have 2nd-arrival sounds from the back that create that soundstage where the 1st-arrival sound maintains imaging, a very pleasant addition that many people love.

Tubes and tube-sounding solid-state amplifiers should be more pleasant to listen to music on, just because of the type of sound that they create. It would only stand to reason that moving from this, in the 2505, to a more accurate amplifier without this added pleasant distortion will take some adjusting to become acclimated to the cleaner production without these artifacts.

Just my take on it, I have many amplifiers and speakers, have had many more, and I don't always prefer the sound of my most accurate and modern pieces, ... this is my theory on why.

 

[Mike Gibson]

All this gushing about the 2505 has a strong basis in truth. Most of us who love this little amp actually have owned one and listened to it for many years. I bought mine new in 1971 after saving up for a year for it and a C-26. It was my main amp for many years until my kids all had made their way in the world and I started having some discretionary funds. I realize that amplification has improved greatly in the years since the 2505 was new. All I care about is that the system is musical and sounds like the recording, warts and all. Over the years I've been on AK I've seen many folks pan different gear. Most that put it down have never owned or spent any time with what they don't like when questioned closely. YMMV.

 

[E-Stat]

As per your mentor HP, who would have noticed or cared if he would have criticized Johnson's fledgling dynaco modifaction company, or a number of others........

An ellipsis has three dots...

The problem with rank objectivity is you potentially piss off folks when you candidly speak the truth. This thread is a great example. I know - I'm the villain - not the OP with whose comments I agreed.

According to Bill Johnson, TAS nearly put Audio Research out of business with its scathing review of the SP4 and D100 products. Fortunately, they took the criticism to heart, redoubled their efforts and produced the highly acclaimed SP6 and D79 components.

Progress moves forward.

You may be aware he really liked the 2301s and gave them an excellent review.