@audphile1
I am certainly good with respectful disagreement. We need more of that around here.
I understand your examples and hear your skepticism but I have been a customer of Steve's now for over 10 years and while I agree with your assessment of his design capabilities, I also believe he is a genuinely good person and I have seen that evidence first hand through working on several projects with him and Patrick, and particularly as we went through the frustration of one project that wasn't a home run initially. Secondly, he and Patrick have been basically swamped with work for the over 10 years I have conversed with them, and they simply don't need the additional volume of work.
I do not know why @soix has chosen to inflate the board issue to the point where people think SMc put him up to it in order to generate projects. IMO, the best thing is to look at Steve McCormack’s own words provided in the message posted earlier in this thread by @soix . The posted message from Steve provides a factual representation of the input board issue and states SMc’s position based on their first-hand experience working on many McCormack amplifiers, including the reason for the issue, which amplifiers are affected, which are not affected, the risks of problems recurring after a "repair" job, an explanation of why they no longer perform input board repairs, and the reason why a more permanent repair using new boards is costly. Steve didn't say nobody could repair amplifiers affected with the board issue, @soix ad-libbed that part:
“when it fails your amp is dead and not repairable by anyone — not even SMcAudio,”
Steve did say SMc no longer does the repairs because of the high rate of post-repair failure, which is apparently a business decision that benefits both SMc and their customers.
|
@mitch2 that’s my point exactly. This thread is a gross exaggeration of an issue that may or may not happen. Contrary to the possible intent, it does no one any favors.
|
Contrary to the possible intent, it does no one any favors.
@audphile1 First, let me be clear I have no business relationship with SMcAudio other than having them upgrade my amp, and implying that was why I made this post is way off base and insulting. And I couldn’t disagree more that this post does no one any favors. If I’m buying a used amp from someone I sure as hell would wanna know if it’s got a good chance of failing and that there’s little chance you’ll find anyone else out there to try to fix the board. Now, if someone knows this info going in and decides to buy a 1990s DNA amp that’s their choice, but at least they’re going in with their eyes wide open and THAT was my main reason for starting this thread. My amp failed, and there have been several other non-working DNA 0.5 and 1 amps being sold solely for parts and there surely will be many more just due to the design of the board and time. Sorry if I maybe could’ve worded this post differently, but make no mistake the intent behind it was purely to be helpful as these amps come up for sale fairly frequently.
|
@soix Didn’t imply that you started the thread to profit. If you read my response and interpreted it as such, you misunderstood my post.
|
@mitch2
I believe you guys are making assumptions based on facts not in evidence, and unfairly casting SMc Audio in a negative light. If you know Steve and Patrick, you would also know that there are not many folks in the audio industry who care as much about the satisfaction of their customers as they do, and you would also know that they have had more than a steady flow of work for years now. Steve continues to move forward with new products benefiting from his 40+ years in the business and, for him, creating high quality audio playback equipment is clearly as much or more a calling than a business. SMc certainly do not need to add clients by fear-mongering owners of old amplifiers manufactured by the former McCormack Audio into taking action before the inevitable failure of their amplifier's input boards.
I do agree with you that most of us have no direct dealings with S. McCormack or Patrick and as such we are just making assumptions based on the facts we can see from our limited interactions (email) or reading of the direct interactions that customers like you have had. As such we may be making the wrong assumption.
The one thing that bothers me in this current situation is the fact the SMc has stopped giving the schematics out for the old 1990's DNA amps to owners/techs interested in servicing them. If you do a bit of searching you'll find where Steve was noted as being quite open to supplying the schematics to folks for a number of years and that has stopped. I also talked with Conrad Johnson and they will also not supply the schematics, but I kind of expected that as CJ bought the rights to those McCormack amps >20yrs ago.
Because these schematics were at one time given out that tells me that Steve didn't consider them proprietary back then, so that wouldn't have changed. If he's worried about the safety factor of these amps then he should've put out a service bulletin and supplied a replacement input board at a reasonable cost many years ago because some of these amps input boards failed early on back 20+ yrs ago. Irregardless, in the interest of safety if that's what SMc is worried about, a large red lettered addendum on the front page of the service manual could be added stating the fact that the amps with input board problems should be considered due for board replacement and should not be repaired.
There are plenty of qualified technical people out there that are capable of servicing these amps. The thing is that many techs will not touch an amp if they cannot get the schematic. The reason is that the amount of labor/time goes up dramatically when you're working on a piece of electronics without a schematic.
BTW, To anyone interested. CJ will still service the DNA amps. When I asked them for the schematics I was given a quote for a full recap and a replacement of the input board.
|
I suspect this is heading way deep into proprietary business issues. Since C-J acquired McCormack, it would seem that any notifications about the equipment would be the responsibility of C-J and likewise any sharing of equipment schematics would be their prerogative.
My (perhaps ill-advised) comment earlier in this thread saying "unless the amps are blowing up and houses are burning down" was clearly intended as tongue-in-cheek to illustrate that IMO the OP was a little over the top in his message. Hopefully, that did not prompt anyone to believe there was an actual safety issue with the input boards. SMc worked on a DNA-2 LAE that I owned and at no time did I hear anything about a safety issue. In the case of my DNA-2, I had a full upgrade performed so the failed input board was replaced as part of a larger project. The decision to spend the money to replace only the input board without further upgrades would obviously vary from owner to owner.
If anyone has service questions, they could visit the McCormack Audio website, where they can find the following message:
McCormack Audio has suspended production of all McCormack brand products and has no remaining inventory.
Service for McCormack products, including model and capacitor upgrades continues to be offered through our sister company, conrad-johnson design, inc.
For more information on service and upgrades of McCormack products, please contact us by email at service@mccormackaudio.com, or by phone at 703-698-8581
|
After 25 - 30 years, ANY amp can fail, go out of spec, or just not perform as well as new. The pricing people are asking on equipment this old is ridiculous, but as always, buyer beware. HNY. My best, MrD.
|
@mrdecibel Completely agree with you on all points. But, the difference here is there is one specific part that has already shown itself very prone to failure for a very specific design reason and, unlike many other older amps and makes it more than likely for the fail and not easily or cheaply repaired because of it. Again, my purpose here was to alert people who may be considering these 1990s amps, that come up for sale quite often, to at least be aware that they’ve got this very fragile and weak link that has, in fact, been failing because this specific part just doesn’t last much more than 20 years. Granted with amps of this age it’s totally buyer beware, but I thought it helpful given this specific situation and failing part that people might at least like to know this going in. Wouldn’t you? Given what I know (and have experienced personally) I certainly would not buy one of these amps unless my plan was to get it upgraded, because there are plenty of other great used amps out there that do not have this specific degrading part and that, even if they do have an issue, can be repaired much easier and cheaper. But that’s me.
|
Soix, I have no problem with your post, as I understand and am behind you !
|
@mitch2
I suspect this is heading way deep into proprietary business issues. Since C-J acquired McCormack, it would seem that any notifications about the equipment would be the responsibility of C-J and likewise any sharing of equipment schematics would be their prerogative.
You would expect that this was the case but there is a thread on Audioasylum with a 2009 date on it where Steve Mc. himself responded on a thread telling a user that PDF schematics were available and he normally responds immediately to email requests for them. That date was about 10yrs after CJ bought the rights to the DNA amps, so if a legal limitation was in effect then the last thing he would be doing is posting and publicly offering schematics to the amps on audio forums. There are also other threads on alternate forums with later dates where people supposedly emailed him and received the schematics. Suddenly in the last few years this openness is no longer the case. I should add that I did ultimately find the schematics by contacting users on DIYAUDIO, but it shouldn’t have to come to that for a 30yr old electronics design. They should be public info after a certain period of time.
My suggestion of safety was not due to your prior statement. I understood your intent. I was just covering the "safety" aspect in case that was the motivational factor for SMc.
|
Just looking for some advice based on the direction this discussion seems to be going: I have a DNA-1 Deluxe that took increasingly long to go through its safety checks before starting until it didn't. I have the box and am set up to send it in with a proposed total replacement of the main board and all power supply capacitors. How far should I go down this rabbit hole before opting out and getting a Benchmark AHB2 or other options? I'll be driving Harbeth M30.1's. an old pain of Celestion SL600's and a slightly new pain of Acarian Alon1's. Thanks.
|
@davidbeagrace Good question to which there is no easy answer as it’s a very personal decision. I ultimately decided to upgrade my DNA 0.5 RevA at SMcAudio when it failed for the following reasons:
- I really like the sound of my amp
- I know getting the amp upgraded will just give me more of everything I already like, so it’s a pretty sure bet
- The upgrade cost with partial gravity base was “only” $2500 and would basically give me a whole new amp
- The other amps I was considering that I was fairly confident would be a significant upgrade we’re all >$5000
- I didn’t really want to go thru the whole search process to find another amp
Taking all those things into account drove me to go with the upgrade. Due to a problem with my preamp I haven’t been able to listen to the amp but hoping I will this weekend, but I’ll forward thoughts once I’ve got some hours on it. Sorry about your amp — I know it sucks — but hope this helps, and best of luck with your decision.
|
Has anyone here had their McCormack DNA-1 renewed by McCormack/conrad-johnson? Feedback? Thanks.
|
@davidbeagrace I recently tried a Simaudio Moon 330a. Thinking it will be a very nice match with your harbeths. Used can be found around $2500. Not discouraging you with McCormack. Just another option that may work just as good or better.
|
@davidbeagrace The only place I’m aware of who renews/upgrades the amps is SMcAudio who built the amps originally but worth exploring CJ. However, you might also wanna contact @bigkidz as he may be willing/able to help as well.
|
@davidbeagrace
CJ is still working on the DNA amps. When I contacted them a couple months back for schematics they offered to upgrade and rebuild the DNA1 I was working on. Here's an excerpt from that email.
"The only repair/update we offer is the R1 main board replacement.
At the same time the amp components are upgraded to the Deluxe level.
The price is $1050 plus shipping for the R1 board replacement.
This is a 25-30 year old amp.
Also the main power supply capacitors have reached their time limits, 20-30 years is normal.
The insulation deteriorates over time, as a result there is more
internal resistance. The resistance causes heat, the heat causes the deterioration to accelerate.
Many times the metal can expands as pressure inside builds up.
There are 16 capacitors in the main power supply.
The supply capacitors replaced at the same time is recommended, and adds another $550.
Replacing the caps would normally have 3hrs labor charges.
However I'll waive the labor for the cap replacement if done with the upgrade, since some of the labor is duplicated.
So around $1600 total, plus box and packing and shipping"
However we didn't go that route so I cannot attest to the work they perform, but at least you know the cost.
|
@kchamber Thanks for sharing this valuable info!
|
@kchamber Just a bit of curiosity. You mention in your post above that you did not go the $1,600 route, but that CJ is working on your amps. Do you mind mentioning what route CJ is taking in updating your amps?
|
@jetter
Sorry I should've been more clear on that. What I meant is that CJ is still repairing and restoring amps that are sent to them. I only contacted CJ for schematics and they offered a full rebuild in response. For my own DNA1 amp and another unit brought to me by a local audiophile, I've done the repairs and upgrades myself.
|
@kchamber Ah, I see, thanks for the clarification.
Was the repair you performed on the "self destructing" motherboard that was more or less the subject of this OP or something else?
|
@jetter
The one amp brought to me was fully functional. It had been back to CJ about 20 years ago for the input board replacement. That was just prior to the current owner purchasing it. It's worked perfectly for him during his time with it. He just wanted it refreshed and upgraded.
The amp I bought as non-functional was killed by someone that tried to upgrade it. I was told "it smokes when it's turned on" They broke a couple of traces and with their botched repairs ended up burning up the voltage reg circuitry. The DNA amps are not a good amp for a beginner to try and modify, especially when it comes to the input board.
So no, neither of these amps came to me due to the protection error from the input board problem. But it sounds like the first one I mentioned had been repaired for that issue prior.
|
My older DNA-1 was running last I checked but the message wasn't hopeful.
I have talked with Steve perhaps twice over the years with and thought he was a straight shooter when he was helping me for free on small stuff on my amp.
Always hung onto it as a 'bullet-proof' backup amp, but maybe not... :-( Still a great amp but almost always sounds too warm on Raidhos, so sitting in storage.
|
So, to summarize,
- It is not unusual for 30+ year old amplifiers to have problems, that in the case of the McCormack Audio amplifiers could be related to boards, capacitors, and/or other things.
- The board issue affects the older DNA-0.5,1,2 series amplifiers and not the newer DNA-125,225 amplifiers.
- McCormack Audio Corporation of Virginia maintains a website but no longer manufactures McCormack Audio amplifiers.
- Repairs of existing McCormack Audio amplifiers, for the purpose of restoring operational function, can be obtained through Conrad-Johnson Design, Inc., i.e.: "Service for McCormack products, including model and capacitor upgrades continues to be offered through our sister company, conrad-johnson design, inc."
- If you want your McCormack Audio amplifier upgraded to a higher performance level than when it was new, the most experienced and best-regarded company to perform that work is SMc Audio.
- You can also have other people do stuff to your amplifier, or you can do stuff to it yourself, if you choose.
- Some people who have done stuff to their own amplifier have screwed it up.
|
@mitch2 your last bullet point is very relevant. We have amplifiers in use by customers that are now at their oldest over 40 and at their youngest nearing 30 years of age. We have seen similar issues with an input circuit board that over the years either through misuse, exposure to heat (poor ventilation) or aging is no longer useful or completely gives up the ghost. Unfortunately we sold out of replacements a couple years ago and made a difficult decision not to produce them any longer. It is interesting to note that these days many of the repair requests we receive come from people who have tried to modify or upgrade the amp themselves or through a third party with not so good results, or bought a modified unit unknowingly that was butchered. Unfortunately the cost to repair what was done and return the amp to original spec outweighs the value of the amp itself. There is something to be said for leaving well enough alone and trust that the designer of the unit knew what they were doing.
|
Wish I had been aware of soil's warning before I bought my used DNA in 2018 from someone on Audio Mart. Upon powering up it took two minutes to move from safety check to operational. When I inquired of the seller about the time, he said that was normal.The two minutes gradually became 3, 4,5 and then stopped becoming operational at all. When I spoke to Patrick at SMcAudio he indicated the start up safely check should be 10 seconds or so..
|
@soix
I have a 90's .5 that I picked up a few years ago. One of 3 amps in my rotation. Thankfully, still working great as of a few months ago until I switched it out for my Hegel. Probably put it back in the system soon to give it a run - fingers crossed! ;-)
The board failure is a known problem that came to my attention when talking with my repair tech a while back. I inquired about switching out the old capacitors and doing a refresh, so to speak. He pretty much advised against it and warned me to not be surprised if it quits on me. Hopefully, I've got one of the hardier ones! Like others, I've been considering sending it in for a makeover. We'll see.
My question is: that you know of, is there any actual risk of fire, other component damage, etc? Seems like a solder or two failing on a board wouldn't be any real threat. But, I'm not an expert by any means. What happened when yours failed?
Thanks
|
@pkatsuleas No risk of fire that I’ve heard of. My amp started taking longer to power on, then worked sporadically and then not at all. Hopefully yours hangs on for a while 🤞🤞🤞. I’d suggest not turning it on and off a lot, and if it’s in your system just leave it on 24/7.
|
@soix
Thanks. Like I said, fingers crossed
|
After reading this I'm never going to buy amp that old again! The OP is correct, there are problems with the traces on the McCormack's input board that develope after a given number of years and may not be repairable unless you want to spend a ton of money on upgrades.
|
Hello Audiogoners,
I see that I'm late to the party here, but I thought I ought to contribute a few clarifications to this thread.
First of all, despite their advancing age, the only DNA amp we've had trouble with is the DNA-1, and ONLY the DNA-1. This is because of age-related problems with the main circuit board, and ONLY that board. I designed a new replacement board for both the DNA-1 and DNA-0.5 several years ago, and this board is both far better than the original and includes all of the circuit improvements I've developed over the years. For this reason, all upgrade work we do on these amps begins with this new circuit board and builds from there, depending on the client's wishes. This is the only path that makes sense for us, and I hope you can see this.
To be clear, this does not mean that your DNA-1 will fail – just that it becomes more likely as time goes by. But it does mean that we will not accept the risk of modifying those original circuit boards. And by the way, there are no safety issues with any of my equipment, regardless of age.
We have always supported our upgrade customers with any service that might be required, and we continue to do so. However, SMc Audio is not a general repair shop for McCormack Audio equipment. We do custom upgrade work, and we take good care of those clients. This has apparently led to the mistaken belief that we don't offer repair service at all, but this is incorrect. Any of our upgrade clients can depend on having their gear repaired as required. If people have stock McCormack gear that needs repair, I will be as helpful as I can with finding appropriate service and providing information that might be needed. Have your local repair tech get in touch with me and I will do my best to help.
Someone here added this comment: “BTW, To anyone interested. CJ will still service the DNA amps. When I asked them for the schematics I was given a quote for a full recap and a replacement of the input board.” All I can say is “good luck with that.” If you have questions about my equipment or need help with anything, PLEASE give us a call.
For various reasons, there are a few pieces that we no longer offer upgrade work on: The DNA-2, DNA-500, ALD-1 preamp, UDP-1 disc player, and any of the CD players. You are still welcome to call us with questions about any of these.
Regarding the main power switch, bypassing is an upgrade option. We feel this is a small sonic improvement if you don't mind using the AC power cord as your “switch.” It's a detail, but we put a lot of effort into improving the entire AC power path for best performance, and the details add up. In the end, it's up to you.
We do suggest leaving your equipment turned on if this is feasible. This may or may not increase the life span of your gear (tubes aside), but it absolutely gives you the best sonic performance. You get to decide if the addition to your electric bill is worth it.
We have a very good track record of making our clients happy with the work we do for them. Still, there have been those (thankfully rare) occasions when something did not turn out as expected. I will always bend over backwards to figure out the problem and make it right, but this requires some back-and-forth with the client to sort out the issue and come to a solution. This is usually successful, but it's hard to bat 1000 in this game. Soix, if we let you down with your DNA-225, I do apologize. I wish we could give it another shot.
Finally, I hope the takeaway from this would be to please contact us if you have any questions about my equipment or the upgrade process. Just give us a call...
I send my best to all and hope that your new year is off to a good start.
Steve McCormack
SMc Audio
|
Soix, if we let you down with your DNA-225, I do apologize. I wish we could give it another shot.
@stevemcx You guys recently upgraded my DNA 0.5 and did not let me down in any way whatsoever — not sure who the unhappy DNA 225 is but definitely not me. I was surprised to learn the input board hasn’t been an issue with the DNA 0.5 and was under the impression that was an issue with virtually all your amps from the 1990s era. I’m honestly a bit confused here.
|
Sorry Soix - my mistake. It was someone else who was dissatisfied with his DNA-225 upgrade. I still wish we could have another go at sorting that out for him.
The original DNA amps all date to the '90s, with a few final pieces of the DNA-1 and 0.5 being built in the Virginia factory after the company was purchased by the Conrad-Johnson Design Group. All of those products are well-aged at this point (somewhat like myself) and showing some age-related problems (somewhat like myself). But the DNA-1 circuit board was the main issue, with weakness in the through-hole plating that often created intermittent problems - truly frustrating to service. This is what prompted me to design the new-and-improved main board. Patrick has corrected me about the DNA-1 not being the ONLY problematic board, as we have seen similar failures in the DNA-0.5 in recent years. Still, the DNA-1 main board was the more difficult problem. The end result is the same - all upgrade work on these amps starts with the new circuit board, and this gives these amps a new lease on life.
To be clear, you are correct - working on any of the '90s era products can be difficult because of the risk of heat damage causing de-lamination of the pads and traces. A good technician can minimize the risk and repair the damage, but switching to a new board eliminates these issues.
I'm glad to know that you are enjoying your upgraded DNA-0.5 - do let us know if you have any questions or need anything further.
Steve McCormack
|
@stevemcx Just to confirm, do the DNA-1 and the DNA-1 DELUXE share the same boards?
Thanks for all your info on this!
db
|
Bummer; I had been in vague discussions with Patrick regarding upgrading my DNA500. Never really got any specific prices. Probably mostly my fault for not pursuing. Anybody know of anyone else doing work on these amps. Maybe it's better to move on to another brand like Pass Labs etc. that's currently in production. Love the DNA500. Still sounds great. I have it paired with CJ Gat. Good match. Has not given me any trouble. Leave it on all the time as the relay switch is sketchy.
|
Photodusty - Yes, the circuit boards are the same in the DNA-1 Standard & Deluxe. The difference was in the higher-performance / more-expensive parts used in key circuit locations in the Deluxe model. This included resistors, capacitors, diodes, wire, and connectors.
The new main board I designed as a replacement upgrade (called the "R3 board") fits both the DNA-1 & DNA-0.5 amps.
Pereza - I'm glad to hear that you're enjoying your DNA-500 - it's a fine amp. The reason we don't offer upgrades for it any more has nothing to do with its circuit boards or any reliability issue - it's just so big and heavy that it becomes a major pain to work on and thus costs a lot more than we feel makes sense. I hope you will continue to enjoy it.
Steve McCormack
|
@stevemcx
Thanks for chiming in here. I've enjoyed your recent vids with Audiophile junkie.
After your initial post I thought my 0.5 was off the hook! Oh well. It is over 20 yrs old after all. I will have to get it back in the system soon and see what happens.
|
Your DNA-0.5 may be just fine. They have held-up better overall than the DNA-1. Give us a call if you have any questions.
Steve M
|
@stevemcx Thanks for chiming in here Steve — most helpful. Not to get too much into the weeds here, but I’d think since I assume both the DNA-1 and 0.5 input boards were designed around the same time and assuming they’re more alike than different, what makes the DNA-1 board more prone to failure, or, what makes the 0.5 board less prone to failure? Just curious because that’s very interesting. Sorry to take your time, but thanks for any thoughts.
|
The DNA-1 design predates the DNA-0.5 by around 2 years. I made several changes to the circuit design for the 0.5, and its circuit boards were a bit smaller and not as complex as the DNA-1. There is a central ground area on the DNA-1 board that is the location of most of the through-plating failures, and this was done differently on the DNA-0.5 board. In the end, the original DNA-0.5 board is a bit smaller, less complex, and less prone to through-plating failures - although as Pat has pointed-out, we have begun to see these failures in the past few years.
I designed an all-new circuit board (called the R3) a few years back when it became clear that working on the original boards was a losing battle. With some careful layout it was possible to make one board that fits both amps, so that was a welcome bit of efficiency. In addition, the quality of the boards we get now is exceptional, and better than the originals.
Steve M
|
All upgrades still available for the the dna750 monos.
LD-2 ?
not for the UDP-1?
|
Thanks for your interest. Yes on the LD-2, but no on the 750 monos and the UDP-1. We have never done upgrade work on the UDP-1, but we have done a few pairs of the 750 monoblocks in the past, but no longer. Like the DNA-2, DNA-500, the 750 monos are just too big and heavy for an efficient workflow. They eat up too much time and are too expensive to be practical.
Steve M
|
#@&&%%**#$
Damn, I spoke with you and Pat about a year ago, and was given a price for capacitor upgrade, and a bunch of other stuff.
Fingers crossed for reliability.
never had good luck with my gear.
I will have to add 750s’ to my kids nightly prayers.
well, if and when there is a breakdown, I will give a call and ask if you have the time for gold+ revision.
cheers Steve, great week.
|
@soix
Are you able to give us sonic impressions of your upgrade yet?
|
@roxy54 Unfortunately not. I’m going through a divorce so my time at home is very limited, but whenever I finally get to hear the damn thing I’ll certainly forward my thoughts. But, I also have to qualify my impressions as I simultaneously changed my preamp to a Linear Tube Audio MZ2 with upgraded LPS (that I’m also using as my top headphone amp) from my former, and excellent, Bryston BP-6. So, I really can’t give an apples to apples comparison, but I’ll definitely forward my impressions for whatever they’re worth. Hopefully will be within a month or so. Sorry for the delay.
|
I didn't see anything posted anywhere in this thread about ARC, but thought I'd comment on it:
@fsonicsmith wrote:
Audio Research Corp will not repair their solid state amps. They say it is not possible.
Pyramid Audio repaired my D400mkii, which ARC says is a very heavy and expensive paperweight if the power caps go bad. (un-serviceable). It works great now, but it's a PITA to deal with from a repair tech perspective (power caps are directly soldered to the boards). But that situation addresses a point brought up in this thread...barring a major malfunction, most equipment can be repaired if someone has the knowledge and/or skill.
Also, I happened to stop by @kchamber's place this weekend to pick up some Aragon gear he worked on and he had the aforementioned DNA-1 in his work area. The input boards are repairable as he and I talked about what needed to be done (time intensive). Since Kevin is local enough to me, I for one would feel fine picking up up a DNA-1 amp and having him work his magic (as he has for a few other pieces of my equipment).
If one doesn't have access to a good tech, caveat emptor (as they say)
So, outside of something catastrophic, if you can find a competent tech one should have no fear of an amp being inoperable.
|
The input boards are repairable as he and I talked about what needed to be done (time intensive).
@atlvalet Yeah, that’s why SMcAudio is no longer doing only the repair. Time intensive = expensive and/or not worth the shop’s time/effort to repair.
|
Board degradation is a fact. And its a terrible thing with Mccormack. Those old Mccormacks were some of the best sounding amps at any price. I have heard B&W paired with many different amps and sources. To this day nothing touches the quality they produced when paired with the Mccormack amps. If I could have anything in audio, a new Mccormack would be at the top of that list. If it existed.
|
@paimei
If I could have anything in audio, a new Mccormack would be at the top of that list. If it existed.
Yes it mostly does exist, as mentioned previously in this thread. If a new McCormack amplifier is truly at the top of your list, then buy one (or two if you want monoblocks) of whatever model McCormack amplifier you want (DNA 0.5, 1.0, 125, or 225, but not the DNA 2) from the used market, send it to Patrick at SMc Audio, and he can create what is essentially a new McCormack amplifier for you, only better sounding than the original - no kidding.
|
to who it may concern did you realize that Conrad Johnson is the sister company and the cad repair that amp you can talk to them directly.
|
|
