Chorus IIs powered McIntosh tubes

[richieb]

"Solid state wins hands-down" - huh? Why and since when? I think ones ears may dictate which sounds best, not just a blanket statement favoring SS over tubes. For me, in my room, with my KHorns and in the past various other Heritage, I prefer tubes. And yes I've owned numerous of both. 

[Dawson's Ridge]

14 minutes ago, richieb said:

"Solid state wins hands-down" - huh? Why and since when? I think ones ears may dictate which sounds best, not just a blanket statement favoring SS over tubes. 

Not a "blanket statement". McIntosh MC275 tube S/N ratio 105dB, THD .5%. McIntosh MC302 SS S/N ratio 120dB, THD 005%. A significant performance difference given today's modern technology. (A S/N ratio of 110dB, and especially over, is considered by most as the 'Holy Grail' in amp performance.)  

[hogwylde09]

I put my old Marantz PM74D up for a while, while I had the McIntosh MC 75's down for some power supply caps. The Marantz is no slouch, by any means. In 1988, Hirsch Houck measured it 1000 hz output power at clipping 132 watts into 8 ohms, 196 watts into 4 ohms, 307 watts into 2 ohms. I realize SS have come a long way since then, but I couldn't get "that" sound, I had grown so accustomed to, for so long. I sold a Pioneer SX-1250, completely gone through, last year. The same applied for it. I do have a Marantz 2252b, in master bedroom which sounds quite good. So it's really apples to oranges. Hard to beat the sheer power of the 1968 Mac's. even if there is a little distortion at higher and I do mean higher, listening levels.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Scottymac63]

My first real stereo was a Pioneer SX-980, absoulety loved it! It was solid and was a rocker for me for well over a decade. I had it stored at my uncle's when I lived out of state in the 90's and for some unexplained reason he sold it at a garage sale. Claimed he didn't think I wanted it. I was floored and quite pissed. I was like, "why did you think I had you store it for me?". So, I bought another one a fews years back and had it completely gone through and use it to spin my vinyl with a pair of Pioneer CS-88's and a Technics SL-M1 turntable.

[absolve2525]

Hi Scotty, I had a SX-980 too, that I bought used while I was a teenager. It worked great, even up until last year sold it to a fellow audio junkie. Really nice sound, versatile, and those looks are just classic. I like vintage Pioneer speakers too! :-)

[NOSValves]

21 hours ago, william.meredith said:

Not a "blanket statement". McIntosh MC275 tube S/N ratio 105dB, THD .5%. McIntosh MC302 SS S/N ratio 120dB, THD 005%. A significant performance difference given today's modern technology. (A S/N ratio of 110dB, and especially over, is considered by most as the 'Holy Grail' in amp performance.)  

  I have to ask how do those specification numbers translate into some type of sound character description? In the real world you can have two amplifiers with identical specs sound completely different..the same can be said for speakers, preamps and sources...

[Dawson's Ridge]

3 hours ago, NOSValves said:

  I have to ask how do those specification numbers translate into some type of sound character description? 

Good question. The numbers themselves don't translate into some type of sound character description (people subjectively just create such notions, Bullshit). The job of the amp is to pass the audio signal from the source to the speakers. To get the best most accurate signal you want an amp that doesn't add any distortion. It is the signal that should be departing the sound quality. You want to hear exactly what the artist recorded and what he/she and the sound engineer want you to hear. The amp should be neutral.

 

Paul W. Klipsch built a speaker company on the premise that distortion degrades the sound quality of an audio signal. He promoted his horn design based on the fact that modulation distortion (FM and AM) was considerably lower in horns when compared to direct-radiator speakers. He found that his horn design yielded a "cleaner" sound because of the lower distortion. 

 

At about the same time Klipsch started his company, Frank McIntosh started his company to build an amp with no distortion. They both knew to get the best sound quality you need speakers and amps with the least amount of distortion. That goal lives today in both companies.

 

Signal-to-noise ration (S/N) is also extremely important. It is the difference between the lowest signal and the highest signal.  A high S/N allows the listener to 'clearly' hear the quietest passages and the loudest passages.  According to Klipsch, distortion will "mask the inner voices". Therefore, the lower the distortion, the higher the S/N.

 

I enjoy listening to music and I want the best sound quality available. That is why own the latest from Klipsch and McIntosh.

[NOSValves]

B

12 hours ago, william.meredith said:

Good question. The numbers themselves don't translate into some type of sound character description (people subjectively just create such notions, Bullshit). The job of the amp is to pass the audio signal from the source to the speakers. To get the best most accurate signal you want an amp that doesn't add any distortion. It is the signal that should be departing the sound quality. You want to hear exactly what the artist recorded and what he/she and the sound engineer want you to hear. The amp should be neutral.

 

Paul W. Klipsch built a speaker company on the premise that distortion degrades the sound quality of an audio signal. He promoted his horn design based on the fact that modulation distortion (FM and AM) was considerably lower in horns when compared to direct-radiator speakers. He found that his horn design yielded a "cleaner" sound because of the lower distortion. 

 

At about the same time Klipsch started his company, Frank McIntosh started his company to build an amp with no distortion. They both knew to get the best sound quality you need speakers and amps with the least amount of distortion. That goal lives today in both companies.

 

Signal-to-noise ration (S/N) is also extremely important. It is the difference between the lowest signal and the highest signal.  A high S/N allows the listener to 'clearly' hear the quietest passages and the loudest passages.  According to Klipsch, distortion will "mask the inner voices". Therefore, the lower the distortion, the higher the S/N.

 

I enjoy listening to music and I want the best sound quality available. That is why own the latest from Klipsch and McIntosh.

  I have nothing against McIntosh amps. However I do not agree with the importance you place on a bunch of basic marketing numbers... The type of the remaining distortion is more important than how much (within reason). The type of distortion among others things beyond the numbers you mention is why two amplifiers testing identically in the areas you place so much importance can sound very different.

[Dawson's Ridge]

12 minutes ago, NOSValves said:

B

 ...in the areas you place so much importance...

 Thankfully I am in good company with Paul Klipsch and Frank McIntosh.

[tube fanatic]

I had numerous discussions about amplifier distortion with the owner of the industrial power supply company at which I did some work years ago (he has a Ph.D in electrical engineering and worked for Crown back in the day).  He believed in the philosophy of having the lowest possible distortion also.  In response I gave him 2 scenarios to consider: 1) listening to an amp with such low distortion that it was the proverbial "straight wire with gain," but reproduced music which sounded like crap to his ears; 2) listening to an amp with much higher distortion but reproduced music that sounded wonderful to his ears.  His answer was that it doesn't matter how awful the former amp sounded because its reproduction was "accurate" to the recording being played.  One of the other techs there, a SET enthusiast and fellow amp designer, rolled his eyes and walked away..............

 

Maynard

[NOSValves]

26 minutes ago, tube fanatic said:

I had numerous discussions about amplifier distortion with the owner of the industrial power supply company at which I did some work years ago (he has a Ph.D in electrical engineering and worked for Crown back in the day).  He believed in the philosophy of having the lowest possible distortion also.  In response I gave him 2 scenarios to consider: 1) listening to an amp with such low distortion that it was the proverbial "straight wire with gain," but reproduced music which sounded like crap to his ears; 2) listening to an amp with much higher distortion but reproduced music that sounded wonderful to his ears.  His answer was that it doesn't matter how awful the former amp sounded because its reproduction was "accurate" to the recording being played.  One of the other techs there, a SET enthusiast and fellow amp designer, rolled his eyes and walked away..............

 

Maynard

 

 

Nice story Maynard.... although SET amps have a bit too much of that warm second order distortion for my taste. What most audio hobbyist don't understand is those ultra low distortion numbers are usually achieved with a bunch of global negative feedback along with multiple layers of local negative feedback... which smears the inner detail out of the signal making it about the furthest thing from transparent, But hey it tests great. The above poster loves his McIntosh amps and there is nothing wrong with that. But the real reason he loves them has very little to do with those specification numbers. If spec number told the entire story plenty of ultra low distortion amplifier can be purchased dirt cheap at Best Buy... no need to purchase expensive McIntosh gear.

 

The trick old Frank McIntosh loved to pull back in the tube audio era was to publish specs on his amps well below true maximum power to give himself an advantage... the MC30 for instance does not show signs of clipping until well over 40 watts but maximum power specs were at the rated 30 watts... MC-60 make well over 70 watts. I have no idea if McIntosh still practices that trick.

[Dawson's Ridge]

1 hour ago, tube fanatic said:

I had numerous discussions about amplifier distortion with the owner of the industrial power supply company at which I did some work years ago (he has a Ph.D in electrical engineering and worked for Crown back in the day).  He believed in the philosophy of having the lowest possible distortion also.  In response I gave him 2 scenarios to consider: 1) listening to an amp with such low distortion that it was the proverbial "straight wire with gain," but reproduced music which sounded like crap to his ears; 2) listening to an amp with much higher distortion but reproduced music that sounded wonderful to his ears.  His answer was that it doesn't matter how awful the former amp sounded because its reproduction was "accurate" to the recording being played.  One of the other techs there, a SET enthusiast and fellow amp designer, rolled his eyes and walked away..............

 

Maynard

Maynard, other than the obvious, that bad recordings sound bad on accurate (low distortion) amplifiers, what is your point? 

[NOSValves]

4 minutes ago, william.meredith said:

Maynard, other than the obvious, that bad recordings sound bad on accurate (low distortion) amplifiers, what is your point? 

 

 

So it seems we have made no ground with our discussion of low distortion amplifiers with you...Let me ask you a question.

 

 Many amplifier exist at a much lower cost than McIntosh that have similar or even lower distortion specifications. This being the case why do you choose to waste money on the high cost McIntosh?

 

 

[Jeff Matthews]

12 hours ago, NOSValves said:

B

  I have nothing against McIntosh amps. However I do not agree with the importance you place on a bunch of basic marketing numbers... The type of the remaining distortion is more important than how much (within reason). The type of distortion among others things beyond the numbers you mention is why two amplifiers testing identically in the areas you place so much importance can sound very different.

 

If you blow a dog whistle and it makes no distortion, does it sound good?

[Chris A]

27 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

 

If you blow a dog whistle and it makes no distortion, does it sound good?

It probably does to the dog.

 

On 9/12/2016 at 11:24 AM, Scottymac63 said:

Recently bought a new McIntosh 275 2-channel tube amp ...it has made my Chorus IIs sound incredible, better than they ever have...warm deep rich bottom end and has taken the edge off the horns.

Has anyone read this book?

 

[Dawson's Ridge]

Chris, thanks for mentioning the book. Along the lines of the ill affects of distortion in the audio signal, Nelson Pass (first watt.com) has published many articles on the subject, as I'm sure you are aware.  

 

http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_dist_fdbk.pdf

[Chris A]

Yes.  The book is an excuse to bring up the subject of high output impedance amplifiers and what they are doing to the sound of loudspeakers that have swinging input impedance over that of voltage-drive amplifiers.

 

Nelson Pass wrote that excellent article "for the common man" on the subject of how medium levels of negative feedback affect the output harmonics of an amplifier.  Either you want gobs of negative feedback or very little feedback to avoid the higher order harmonics generated.  I find a lot of discussion where the subject is "subjective sound of amplifiers with and without negative feedback"--when what they're talking about can actually be measured and tied to human hearing characteristics, namely "masking". 

 

Chris

 

[Chris A]

Mr. Pass also wrote a fairly interesting article on current source amplification (which was the article that I originally thought you might of linked above):

 

http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_cs_amps.pdf

 

 

 

 

[Dawson's Ridge]

22 hours ago, NOSValves said:

 

 This being the case why do you choose to waste money on the high cost McIntosh?

 

 

There are many good reasons to own McIntosh amplifiers. But the main reason is their exclusive use of output transformers which "impose no limitations on frequency response, regardless of swings in impedance". A waste of money, hardly, especially if listening to good recordings, as opposed to bad, in your home is a priority.    

[jimjimbo]

Waste money on Mcintosh?  I think the only way to "waste" money on Mcintosh is to purchase a unit for an exorbitant price that has not been fully checked out and/or fully restored by a highly skilled and well known expert such as Terry Dewick (mcintoshaudio.com) or Yves Beauvais.(vintagevacuumaudio.com).  I am not knowledgeable of the current Mcintosh products, but currently own MC30's, MC240, and a host of tube and SS preamps, along with other brands of highly regarded amplifiers, and I will say that the Mcintosh units sound better (to me) than anything else.  The channel separation, the midrange clarity and the low frequencies are simply stellar IMHO.  Not to mention, they look great, and obviously hold their resale value very, very well.