2. amps-preamps
  3. 1241673186

Mcintosh C1000T users opinions

I recently purchased two Mcintosh MC 2301 monoblocs that I'll be using with a Mcintosh C1000T, they'll all be delivered later this week. Just wondering if anyone out there can give any impressions on the C1000T's phono section. I have a Rega P9 w/RB1000 tonearm and a Micro Benz LP moving coil (Low output) cartridge, I run it through a 4 year old Audio Research Reference Phono Preamp (Tubes). The phono section on my old Mcintosh C2200 was terrible compared to the Audio Research Reference, just wondering about the phono section on the C1000T (Particularly the moving coil input). The Audio Research will be hard to beat (It sounds amazing) but it would be cool and handy if the phono section on the C1000T was up to the Audio Research's standard. All opinions and advise welcome!
nocaster
7 responses Add your response
klipschfan
176 posts
 
Ask here http://www.audioaficionado.org/
ontjesr
157 posts
 
The 1000 series has an exceptional, i.e., first class phono stage. You will be very happy with the synergy of it w/the 2301's. What speakers, may I ask??

P.S. I have a pair of those gorgeous amps being fed by a C2300 (I'll eventually go for a 1000 pre -- just not yet).
nocaster OP
52 posts
 
I have a pair of the original Sonus Faber Guarneri Homage and I am very happy with them. I listened to a pair of the new Sonus Faber Amati Anniversario model driven by a pair of 2k Mcintosh monoblocs, very nice but not like my Guarneri. There is something about a two way speaker that is more pleasing to my ears than even a great 3 way design. I find in general that the big 3 ways sound a little boxy, just my two cents.
gpgr4blu
1,088 posts
 
The C1000T is the finest phono stage I have ever had in my system (by alot). I've had the C2200, Dynavector and Graham Slee ERA Gold. The GS was very good, the Mac 2200 was okay, but the C1000 was in another league. I had a brief in house comparison with ARC PH 7. Close, but I slightly preferred the Mac as having a little smoother and more realistic take on vocals particularly --seemed like a more complete rendition. ARC had other strengths. I can understand someone preferring the ARC but you will not be disappointed with the C1000. Since this thread is about a month old, I assume you have made the comparison yourself. What conclusion did you reach?
nocaster OP
52 posts
 
I A/B'd the phono section on the C1000T VS the ARC Reference Phono and although the phono section of the C1000T is in another league compared to the C2200 it is not up to the standards of the ARC Reference Phono Preamp. The ARC is quiter and more transparent, and its ability to resolve the fine details in just better. I agree that the C1000T is a great phone section and very flowing, but the ARC delivers the kind of performance that a dedicated reference should and does deliver. I must say however that if I did not already have the ARC in my system I would probably not feel I had to run out and buy one as compared to the C1000T phono section.
gpgr4blu
1,088 posts
 
I see ARC is coming out with a ref phono 2 introduced at the Munich high end show a week or 2 ago. You can find a photo in Alan Sircom's blog on AVGUIDE.com. It has adjustable curves like the Zanden---RIAA being one. I'll check it out later this summer, time and $ willing.
nocaster OP
52 posts
 
Interesting about the reference 2. I'm going stay with the Reference Phono I have because it really does not lack anything anywhere. Would be nice to see a comparison though.
Log in to respond
More to discover
80x80
Lamm Industries LL-1 Signature/ ML-3 Signature with Custom CMS Racks
80x80
BAT VK80t
80x80
TriangleArt Reference Tube Preamplifier