I've had Mcintosh separates (MC452/C2600) for few years and agree with everyone above. MAC is darker sounding with rolled off highs. It does have an amazing midrange and bass. I'm a classical guy and it wasn't enough detail in piano, totally rolled off, and other solo instruments sounded veiled.
If you're going for Luxman, go for their Class A amps and nothing less. If you get anything less you may regret it and will be tempted to upgrade later. The 590 and 595 in particular were my favorite. These come as close to tube sound as possible without having tubes. Ultimately, I ended up with a powerful SET to drive my speakers. SET is the end game in hi end music. Period.
|
Update…Luxman ordered. 😁 I’ll check back in a week or so. Thanks to everyone.
~ Jerry
|
It would be good if you could listen the the Luxman in your system before you decide. I own the Ma 352 which is the bigger brother to your amp. I can tell you there are attributes to my mac that I just like. I also have a Pass 250, Accuphase 380, Hegal 390. Yet I still enjoy my mac, and I miss no detail at all. In some cased I hear more detail then my Pass.
|
Lots of 100 Volt Luxmans out there...new and used...Be Careful. They're made for the Japanese market and they will sell it to Americans.
|
@paul8088
As for upgrade streamers/DAC from the Bluesound there are many countless options out there : Aurender, Lumin, Linn, Naim, Chord, Simaudio, PS Audio DS DAC with networked bridge ii, Cary Audio, Teac, Esoteric, DCS, and many others depending on your budget.
|
I’d put the new Innuos Pulse Mini on your radar for a streamer, and as @jjss49 recommended above an upgraded linear power supply (not necessarily Innuos’ own LPS) should be included in your budget to get the best performance out of it. Best of luck with all this, and please do share your impressions if you could. Curious minds wanna know. BTW, I’ve got 100 bucks the OP chooses the Luxman if anyone wants to take the other side. Heh heh.
|
I owed Mcintosh separates for a long time, once I could afford them. I agree with most of the posts here, it's a bit light at the top end, and to me a bit dark, now that I own the Luxman 590AXII, the Luxman sound could not be more different, and to me much better. I would not go back to Mcintosh, old or new. By the way, I have received a lot of nasty responses any time that I talked down about Mcintosh, but I am simply telling my experience, the Luxman sounds better to me then the Mcintosh I owned. I would suggest to try it out, with a return policy as it will sound much different then the Mcintosh, and yes, give it a little time it to open up and for you to get use to it.
I also owned the Bluesound (I have since upgraded to Aurender) and would agree with the others that it's a great little streamer, but you could easily do much better.
|
I recently traded my Mac MA5300 for a Luxman L-550AX ll. New, out of the box, the Luxman was a great disappointment. After two days, I put it back in the box. Two days later, I tried it again. It started to morph into a revealing, open soundstage approaching holography. It's the most expensive integrated I've ever bought. I do not regret the purchase, and I'm digging it. As previously posted, the Bluesound Node, IMO is your gate.
|
Not sure how helpful this will be. However, FWIW, several years ago, I spent a couple hours critically listening to a MAC MA5200 and the Luxman in a head-to-head demo, using a Rega P3 equipped with an Ortofon Blue, Focal Aria 936 and a Rega Apollo CD player with well-engineered CD recordings and very good, very clean vinyl pressings. The CDs were my own; so, music I was very familiar with. Of course, this was a SS-to-SS shoot-out. What you have in mind is hybrid to SS, a different ballgame. My ears thought the MA5200 and the Luxman sounded virtually identical.
I've never spent any time with an MA252 and haven't spent much time with those Maggies. So, can't say what the A/B matchup you have in mind would be like. Going on specs, alone, I would say your ears will likely prefer the amp with the most robust power supply for those Maggies (i.e. not WATTS; power supply). Regardless, as with all things audiophile, let your ears be the judge.
BTW: Having critically listened to many MAC amps, over the years (more than Luxies); my ears would most definitely not agree that MAC's general sound signature is "very heavy (on) midrange and bass"; "rolled off in the upper treble range (veiling) upper-octave detail and the openness of the overall soundstage", that "Luxman ... has better dimensionality, textures and image specificity compared to comparably priced Mac(s)", that the "music would sound more dimensional with better instrumental/voice textures and imaging with the Luxman", that "Mac slightly lacks the last bits of details, resolution, texture and dimensionality in comparison to Luxman", that Luxman is "more musical and provided much more depth and detail than the McIntosh", etc.
I would agree, however, that this definitely depends upon the speakers used and likely would be a matter of preference, given equitably matched amps in a head-to-head shoot-out. Speakers are always the business end of any sound system.
|
a few comments to add to this conversation
1. i concur 100% with @ghdprentice on mac vs luxman solid state -- luxman will be leaner cleaner sounding, more linear top to bottom, whereas mac is voiced to me warmer fuller in mids and midbass with notable obscuring of treble detail and air in comparison
2. mac makes ss amps models with and without autoformers, they sound different, autoformers at the output stage gives further warmth, while mac models without will sound more ’typically’ solid state, with better transient response but a leaner presentation - still even non autoformer ss mac amps will be voiced richer warmer than commensurate luxman model
3. the comparison is further complicated by the fact that the op has the mac252 which is a non autoformer HYBRID integrated amp model, with 12au7/at7 tube pre section... thus even more notable tubey presentation, very much apples to oranges vs luxman 507 straight ss class ab
4. as for the bluesound node, if the op has the n130 (latest model, much improved over the older 2 and 2i sonically) the dac analog output will be pretty good, but can be improved with a power supply upgrade (there are several vendors)... i bought one for fun with the pd creative lps mod and using a proper lps the sound is definitely improved (cleaner transients, improved tonality and timbre), the internal smps definitely holds the unit back, slurs the sound and diminishes soundstage
5. even though the bs node with power supply upgrade is very good sounding at under $1000 (with mods and lps) there are many other as good or slightly better sounding dac/streamers on the market in the $1000-1500 price range - which would allow the op to enjoy the purer sound of the luxman more effortlessly
|
@caphill whats a good replacement for Bluesound?
|
I did the switch and even a side-by-side comparaison and Luxman was my favorite no questions asked
The Mac: C712 + MC7100
The Luxman: L-509X
The Mac was from the 90's so not a fair comparaison, but there were separate.
The Lux is much more detailled with a wide soudnstage. The voices were crisp and so clear, you can almost smell the breath of the signer!
The Mac has slighly more bass, but not as clean as the Lux. Th overall sound was warmer.
In the end, it is very different sound and it's a matter of personal preferences. And not all Max/Lux sound the same.
|
Again, everyone, thanks for your feedback. It's much appreciated.
@caphill ...yeah, a new streamer would be next on my list. I guess at the moment, I'm smitten with the Luxman amp.
@woots ...thanks for the recommendation
@audioman58...super cool integrated, and if I had an extra $6k laying around, I'd probably go that route. I forgot to mention in my post, I want to stay in the $2k-$3k range, out-of-pocket. Trading in my hybrid McIntosh gets me there.
@soix...I like your attitude. Just go for it!
I'll keep you all updated. Have a great day! ~ Jerry
|
I would try the Luxman, I bet you will keep it.
Return shipping Cost: it’s no loss, if you keep it, you have to send them the McIntosh. Keep the McIntosh, return the Luxman, Soooo it isn’t any more cost to try it.
I’ve got a Luxman, 10 wpc tube amp in my Office System. My 1st and only Luxman. Except for price, I wholeheartedly recommend it, and, over time, you forget the price. You are simply not aware of it, just the wonderful involving music.
It has built in MM/MC Phono, I’m using it’s MM with my AT440ml MM cartridge, also quite happy with that part of it. Just to say, I’m happy with all aspects of my Luxman.
https://www.luxman.com/product/detail.php?id=33
https://www.stereophile.com/content/luxman-sq-n150-integrated-amplifier
Now playing my restored AR-2ax, sensitivity 91.5.
https://stereonomono.blogspot.com/2014/05/acoustic-research-ar-2ax.html
Previously played the least efficient 87db speakers I own, Wharfedale Diamond 225.
https://www.wharfedale.co.uk/diamond-225/
As reviewers say, it seems to have plenty of reserve power, yes it does, it drove the inefficient Wharfedale’s with more volume than I want/need. Perhaps ’extra power’ is true of the Luxman you are considering, I suspect so.
.............................................
I had McIntosh Mc2250 SS 250 wpc in main system when I was using my JSE Infinite Slope Model II’s, 4 way sensitivity 90db. I played with more volume in that larger space, and my current at the time 30 wpc tube amps seemed underpowered. I have to agree, it was more like a muscle car, impressive, yet not as invisibly involving.
I went back to highly efficient horns/15" woofer and switched back to tubes, sold the MC2250, don’t miss it one bit.
IF the Luxman had 16 ohm taps, like my Cayin A88T does (22 or 45 wpc) I am sure the Luxman could drive my main system wonderfully. Cayin is also invisibly involving, which is simply magic when that quality exists.
|
This is their latest and best the 507Z my friend bought one and got a very fair deal
from Perrotta Consultants ,these new models have a better layout and sound even better weighs around56 pounds ,very well done ,retail $9500 but he got a nice deal.
I think he got the very good AQ Thunder power cord with it which retail is over $1k together for under the retail price, if you needed a new top power cord.
https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/49344/
|
As a current owner of McIntosh MX160 and MC8207 and former owner of a pair MC1.25kw mono blocks the answer for me is go with the Luxman. Two years ago I decided to "see what else was out there" and demoed several amps from various manufacturer's. I demoed Luxman, Audio Research, Boulder and a few others. Without a doubt the Luxman was significantly more musical and provided much more depth and detail than the McIntosh. You could hear music on the Luxman, in terms of detail, that you do not hear with the McIntosh. Research Ohms law and it will help provide more guidance about how the Luxman operates versus the McIntosh. Because the Luxman goes lower in Ohms, especially with electrostats, you will be amazed at your improved soundstage and overall tonality. Another thing because of how the Luxman is built you don't need as much watts per channel to drive the speakers. At the time I had Martin Logan ESL15 electrostats and the Luxman combo "blew away" my Mac/Martin Logan combo in every way. So, my vote is for the Luxman and don't look back.
Let us know what you decide to do.
|
@jrod68
You will need to upgrade your source component (your Bluesound streamer) to something better. Your Bluesound streamer is the bottleneck and is holding up your entire system setup IMO.
As for Luxman vs Mac I would say it’s a matter of preference. both are great but I found in general the Luxman sounded more tubey with lush sweet highs and midrange and holographic imaging and soundstage, and while the highs are extended but it’s very smooth with perfect amount of details and resolution. The Luxman IMO has better dimensionality, textures and image specificity compared to comparably priced Mac. The music would sound more dimensional with better instrumental/voice textures and imaging with the Luxman. I felt the Mac slightly lacks the last bits of details, resolution, texture and dimensionality in comparison to Luxman. But again it also depends on what type of speakers you are driving. I’m not sure about your Maggie’s or any Maggie’s speakers in general as I don’t have much experience with Maggie’s at all.
My preference would be for Luxman but again it also depends on the synergy between your speakers and amp and other upstream electronics and cables. It’s all about system synergy. There’s no absolute answer in this hobby. Mac gears will pair better with certain speakers while the Luxman will probably pair better with other sets of speakers.
|
Go with Mcintosh - the 1.25s
|
If the Luxman revitalizes your system, I’d think the cost of return shipping is a relatively small price to pay, especially at this level. I say go for it! Otherwise u may never know, which as a fellow Audiophile I know will gnaw at u like a mole. Some things are just worth paying for, and an in-home audition is one of them. Just do it!!!
|
TMR has a 14 day return policy. I assume I’m on the hook for return shipping, should I decided against the Luxman. Shipping is not cheap, but hey, getting a really cool piece of equipment to try out sounds like fun! Thanks again guys.
~ Jerry
|
Thanks guys. I really appreciate your input. I like the comparison of McIntosh to a muscle car. Very appropriate! I do appreciate the “tonally rich” sound of my MA252. It sounds like the Lux is a totally different animal altogether. The Mc has qualities that I like, so maybe I’m better off keeping it. I’ll have to check on the TMR return policy. ~ Jerry
|
@soix
+1
My C2700/MC611 system is excellent. Mid-bass/bass to die for. I do agree about the highs. I fixed this issue by pairing Nordost Valhalla 2 XLRs between my DAC and the C2700; boy, what a difference! It has transformed the MAC system from top to bottom.
@jrod68
I went from a Luxman 590 AXII to my current McIntosh system. The Luxman did not have enough power to drive my speakers. I did compare the McIntosh to the Luxman M10x and accompanying preamp. The Luxman is fabulous and more detailed than the MAC. However, the MAC is warmer and far more powerful with thunderous bass. My preference is for warmth and bass as exemplified by the direction I headed. It's all up to what your ears tell you!
|
My experience with Mac is that it’s very tonally rich but is rolled off in the upper treble range that veils upper-octave detail and the openness of the overall soundstage. My experience comes from working for Magnolia at Best Buy and hearing the KEF Blades driven by Mac gear and it sounded like a blanket was thrown over the KEFs relative to how I’ve heard them sound at audio shows. It was a disgrace and total sonic mismatch IMHO. My guess is Luxman will do a better job in this area without ever sounding etched or hyper detailed. Given what you’re looking for I think Luxman could be a considerable upgrade. Just my $0.02 FWIW.
|
Luxman and MacIntosh could not be much more different. Luxman is rather evenly tonally balanced but with forward treble and lean midrange and bass and big on buttons and dials. MacIntosh is very heavy midrange and bass. Mac… the “muscle car”… Luxman the Toyota Avalon.
You definitely need to let your ears draw you to your choice.
|
@erik_squires Thanks for the input! I saw your posts from a few years ago about your Luxman. I was hoping you'd chime in. 😀
My only concern is that I've regretted selling equipment in the past. If the Luxman is the one, then the McIntosh has to go. That's the rub.
Yeah, the 509 would be sweet....but it's at a price-point that's higher than I'm willing to go. ~ Jerry
|
Hey, I own the last new 507ux in the US, very happy with it.
The general characteristics are it feels very extended, and makes other amps seem like they don’t have enough bandwidth. It has a very sweet tube-like midrange to treble presentation. While it sounds like the top end goes over forever it’s also super smooth and not harsh.
|
