anyone use mcintosh & jeff rowland together?

most likely it will be the 201 monos. the continuum integrates are interesting, but they might not be as flexible as separates. i want to live with both sets (tube & SS)of electronics for a while. if i clearly prefer one over the other, then i will step up in that line & have one system. depends on what combo i like the best & if the tubes get too warm in the summer. i wanted to make sure that i'm not getting a component that isn't compatable at all. i appreciate your input!

Tim, the JRDG 201 monos appear to have an input impedance of 40KOhms balanced. This value is probably safe for most preamps. What is the balanced output impedance of your MCIntosh?
You will find 201 specs at:
http://jeffrowland.com/M201.htm

the manual says 250 ohms & doesn't specify balanced -vs- unbalanced. i assume that a lower pre output and higher pwr input is ideal? any idea if the 500 monos offer anything besides more power? do the respective integrateds have any pros or cons that you are aware of?why is the 300 series so much more expensive and less power?

Tim1, if Mac has output impedance of 250Ohms, the 40KOhms input of 201 will accommodate it quite well.

The 501 monos, Continuum 500, and 312 all contains the same underlying 1000ASP modules and yield the same nominal power of 500W with a max 45A current. Having said that, the devices' designs are increasingly sophisticated as you move up in price. I have published a brief discussion of the JRDG 312 on issue 188 of TAS, I believe around page 80.

The 201 and Continuum 250 are instead designed around the 500ASP modules. Unfortunately I do not know too much about 201 and 501 internals, but I can tell you that the 501 yields a much more full bodied and authoritative sound than the 201s. None of these 3 devices contain the internal PFC rectifier that give the C500 and 312 their magic, but they do accept external units to bridge some of the gap.

Guido