Has Anyone Compared the 2 McIntosh Integrateds?

I recently purchased the MA6500 and have been very happy. According to an email response from McIntosh tech support, the MA6500 is a combination "C15 preamp and direct coupled version of the MC202 amp." The MA6900 is described as a combination of features from the C42 and MC202. I have not been able to audition the MA6900. I would think any sound quality difference would be more dependent on the type of speaker used and its impedence plot. I would think the 6900 would handle low impedence / low sensitivity speakers better because of the autoformers. With easy to drive speakers (I'm using Spendor s3/5 - 8 ohm) I can not see the benefit of the autoformers outside of DC protection. The Sam Tellig review in Stereophile claims that the MA6900's output transitors "look for a load of 2.9 ohms before the signal goes to the autoformers." Therefore, for easy to drive speakers 4 ohm or greater, I would expect less benefit from the autoformer. Again, this is only confirmed with audition. Either integrated delivers more power than I need. As I leave tone controls in bypass mode, the c42 based preamp is not a personal need.

Thanks for the insightful response!

Hey! I have listened to both and I find that for the cost savings, the 6500 is the way to go. Both are incredibly sweet and the 6900 is a tad more so but I feel it is not worth $1500 more (do you need an equalizer?). Of course, if I could afford either one, I would be tempted to get autoformers since that is one thing Mcintosh is famous for (as well as Finao1's mentioning of better low z control). Having said that, I own one of their direct-coupled amps (MC7100) and I find it is highly underrated. I just love it - it beats my previous Krells to bits in terms of liquidity and balance across the band. Either way for the integrateds since you cannot go wrong with McIntosh IMO.