Mc Levinson vs McIntosh 601
I do not know the Levinson sound well, other than a long audition at a retail store. They were incredible driving Thiel 3.7’s with Transparent Reference cables. I was there evaluating the Thiels and the presentation all together was outstanding. I believe the 601’s are slightly different from the more traditional Mcintosh sound which is warm, full-bodied, generous midrange, sweet top end, plenty of detail but not the last word in resolution. I prefer that presentation with the right ancillary eq. The 601’s have a little more speed, air, and transparancy than my 501’s for example. And I have also heard the 611’s may take that even further. |
Good amplifiers should not and do not have a sound of their own: they should be what Peter Walker once called 'a straight wire with gain'. However, this is conditional on three things, apart from basic design flaws. First, they should have enough overload margin on their inputs. Second their frequency response should not be load dependent, and third they should have enough power to deal with dynamics peaks without clipping. Get it wrong on any of these, and amplifiers will have a sonic signature. Fortunately, it is easy (and cheap) to get it right, even if some (or even quite a few) expensive audiophile amplifiers fail the test. If you are really keen to compare two amplifiers, you have to do so with levels carefully matched, i.e within 0.2 dB. You cannot do that by ear or with a sound meter - you will need a Volt meter. Get this wrong, and the louder one will always sound better. For authorative discussion, see the site of Douglas Self, one of the world's most respected amplifier designers: http://www.douglas-self.com/ampins/pseudo/subjectv.htm |
