Tough amp decision

Sorry for the typo. Make that tubes not tunes. 

If you liked the sound of your past and current McIntosh SS, that MA 8950 is an amazing combo of features. One location, zero cables for DAC and minimum cables for Phono is a good thing. Single remote also a treat.

There must be reviews online about the DAC2, which are easily upgraded, and the sound quality of their MM and MC (adjustable) phono stages.

8/4/2 ohms, 200wpc, with big reserve for instantaneous needs.

I imagine it has balance electronically, thus adjust for errant tracks from listening position. I wish the equalizer was remote also, always better than adjusting on he device. Those are personal peeves of mine, and very few (none I know of) have remote balance/eq.

The MA352 is a beauty, and you get tube front end, very nice, less features, but you have some separates now.

200wpc 8 ohms, 320 wpc 4 ohms is nice feature to have

As for speakers, don't forget you can adjust them for your room/placement/preferences with the EQ in the MA 8950, another reason to choose that amp.

It doesn't hurt to think resale when choosing.

I may upset some people by saying this but McIntosh, if you were to compare it to golf, I have found McIntosh, to always be a beautiful 230 yard drive straight down the middle of the fairway.  There is no slice, no hook, the flight path is perfect.  That said, I have found music is more the full game of golf.  There are dog legs, chips, putts, roughs and hazards.  I have McIntosh, but I don't find myself listening to it that much. 

@hoosierinohio    Sell it then and reap the profit. 

@stereo5 I would sell it, but sometimes you just gotta have that perfect drive, down the middle of the fairway.  I've tried selling in the past and it never goes well for me.  I miss what I sell, so unfortunately I have become an accumulator.  If I sold that amp, I would miss it's sound and just buy another.  I have made a life commitment to one woman but when it comes to hi-fi, I'm a slut. 

I liked the parasound JC5 allot better the mc462

I would say this is important decision sonically. I would not be in a hurry. MACs have a very distinctive sound. Make sure that is what you want. MacIntosh is frequently paired with B&W… because Mac is very midrange and bass heavy. Great for rock. Lots of folks love them. But there is more nuanced equipment.

You are talking about moving from ARC sound… granted 20 years old to Mac. Make sure you do extensive auditioning.

Also, putting multiple functions in one box normally means compromised sound quality. All the companies are getting better at it. But if sound quality is your top priority, the you want separates. More advances have been made in pre and amp. If space is a problem then this makes sense… depends on your long term strategy… continue improving sound quality of tidy things up.

Going from older equipment to newer is likely to sound better of course.

MC462 is a better amp than the MC312. Don't rule out the MA12000. Best of Mac tubes/solid state in a single package. Probably the best value in the Mac lineup!

"I have made a life commitment to one woman but when it comes to hi-fi, I'm a slut."

Best Audiogon comment in years.

David

Fellow Hoosier

@armstrod ditto plus 10X!

Thanks much. Comments and discussion has me being more careful, rather than jumping on the deal for the used 8950. Reviews seem to indicate the included DAC is not as good as my Qutest, and that I can do better with a separate phono stage. The 8950 has a pre to power amp jumper so during audition should be able to try my tube LS25 pre with the power amp section of the 8950. Thanks for all the helpful discussion. 

Also seems the Parasound JC5 might be a good choice. I like classical music and also some rock and jazz. Reviews indicate JC5 could be better for instrument timbres and soundstage. Said to have better bass dynamics too. 

McIntosh for sure!

You have an excellent preamp. Just get a better amp. Also, don’t expect the McIntosh internal dac to be as good as the Qutest. 

i like the idea of an integrated w/ phono.  keep in mind that in this configuration, you will likely need to place your turntable nearby, as these low voltage signals often require.  

No offense to the Mac crowd, but they have maintained their house sound to the detriment of a more modern taste in sound presentation. I personally find Mac veiled and muddy in comparison to newer designs. I prefer greater neutrality than Mac but also more engagement like Pass Labs, Classe’, Hegel (cheaper option). I have not heard the Parasound but the JC5 would probably be the only one I would consider. I suspect the Mac and the JC5 will be polar opposites in terms of presentation so I’m a little confused by the OP’s selection of these Amps. The Qutest is also not the last word in modern DAC presentation (old school and a little sterile in comparison to say an R2R DAC sounds). My suggestion is to broaden your parameters and see what more modern gear offers these days.

Also a Hoosier! Beat Purdue!!

You absolutely have to listen to the Mc and Parasound.  They don't sound alike at all to me.

Other brands to consider:  Ayre, Luxman.

Comparing the JC5 and the Mcintoshes precisely because they are so different. Not so easy for me to get to a dealer and have to screen based on reading (and what you say!). Everything seems to point to Qutest being better than the McIntosh internal DAC. In the long run think I will go separates due to versatility and better sound quality given what I already have. Was hoping to extract pieces for a second system, but would kick myself later. Several folks say the standalone amp with my pre would sound better than the integrateds. 

McIntosh Have a unique sound and look that some prefer, but it seemingly doesn’t compete well with top rated brand/models.

An integrated saves $ on casework and cables, but is less flexible for future upgrades.

Generally speaking, tube gear has a much warmer midrange that many find attractive, but it’s often not a sound reflective of live music. Also, the highs may be limited and the bass slower and and less defined than SS. SS usually has a more linear frequency response aka less coloring, is quicker, and maybe more accurate than tubes.

The OP seems somewhat undecided on tubes vs SS, and integrated vs separates.

If the OP has to purchase without auditioning first, then maybe a safe bet would be a Hegel H390 or the older H360 integrated which has a good sounding DAC.  Hegel receives many positive reviews.  Buying used will save you significant $.

OP,

If you are not near a dealer, I recommend  weekend trip to a city. Make it a fun mini-vacation. Set up appointments with a couple audio dealers… say you are from out of town. Have them setup and ready when you arrive. If you take your partner plan on dinner and some evening activity. 

the more I read from the pros here, the more I want separates! I am posting my ad today for my much loved integrated Amp! Baby steps...

The best performing components are separate boxes. I currently have both a stereo Audio Research Reference 160 stereo amplifier and the exact same design / implementation.. Reference 160 mono blocks. So the channels are separated in the mono blocks. There really is no question the mono blocks sound better. Folks may disagree if it is worth the extra cost… but I think few would disagree the mono blocks sound better.

Combining functions (holding other variables the same) reduces sound quality. Interactions of the circuits virtually guarantee this. While design and technology gets better… so does the single box solutions.

So, all things being equal… the less functions the better.

@ghdprentice 

I guess integrated amps are cheaper, than an amp and a preamp (and separate phono stage) so I wonder what the best value is for x, for the sake of argument ~$1500, total. Seems that it will only buy the lowest end of the separates while somewhat of a mid-tier of integrated solid state amps.

@grislybutter 

At ~$1500… I certainly would not go with mono blocks… a lot of extra chassis cost for inexpensive internal components. Maybe even for separates. My office system has a PrimaLuna integrated amp. I think at that price point… if you choose really carefully integrated is the only thing that will get you near HiFi. 
 

In the audiophile domain, mono blocks win. 

thanks @ghdprentice 

I guess that will be a while, I will tweak other parts until my mono block phase arrives.

I feel like I need to take this conversation in a new direction. I have owned a number of power amps over the years, including tube amps from Audio Research a Lamb. I now have Pass XA60.8 power amps combined with an Audio Research Aniversery Edition preamp and I am completely happy.   I had the Lamb and Pass amplifiers at the same time and decided to keep the Pass and sell the Lambs. I think Nelson has created wonderful amplification equipment. If you decide on an integrated amp, the Pass INT-60 is also beautiful. I own both. 
Recently I upgraded my digital system by adding a Innuos streamer and USB reclocker, and I have been amazed at improvement in the digital playback. 
 

I think the quality of amplification is more important than the quantity. Both Pass amps are class A   

@russ751 

Yes, the Pass INT-60 is a really outstanding sounding integrated. I was really impressed with its rhythm and pace… for an integrated the musicality and nuanced sound and power is very impressive.

@arhgef 

Do not rule out the sound quality of the MAC DA2. I have a C2700 into a pair of MC 611s. My additional DAC is an Aries Cerat Helene ($17K).  This DAC weighs more than most amplifiers. Yes, the Helene is better all around, but for the price and convenience, my jaw drops as to how good the DA2 sounds!

If you are looking for an absolutely heavenly sound, look into the MAC MA12000 paired with your speakers. It provides a better value than separates. 

Overwhelming choices here! Thanks everyone for the advice and my now long list of amps to consider. I was able to get Mcintosh integrateds into the house. Not much else available to audition locally. We enjoyed the 312 (tube pre, solid state power) and were amazed at how a new amp could remove the harshness we heard on some recordings for the old B and W. Many other improvements too. However, most telling was auditioning the 8950 (both sections solid state). It had a jumper between pre and power so we could try combining our ARC LS25 mkII pre with the power amp of the Mcintosh. We really enjoyed the music more with the LS25 pre.  Much more defined bass, better imaging, and overall more musical sound. Also our Qutest DAC was better than the one built in the Mcintosh. I should add that this is all for our ears of course. Listen to a lot of classical, jazz and some rock. Here is the issue: My current best option is to pay $6800 for a Mcintosh 312. I can also get a pair of Parasound JC1+ for about 10K open box. Our budget only really stretches to 7K but we could try to pull together more. Is it worth auditioning a JC5 by mail? Based on discussion here seems that would be smart before committing locally to a Mcintosh. I might take road trip and audition things with B and W 703 s3, which are probably most like my old B and W 803 matrix series 2. I already threw out my back with the 8950, but I think that is just a learning experience for beautiful music with amps like these. Thanks everyone for your help.

OP,

Great to hear your progress.

Just a note. The difference you heard when swapping in the Audio Research preamp with the MAC amp is pretty much the definition of the difference between the house sound Audio Research versus MacIntosh. If you like one versus the other I would stick with the one you like. I prefer Audio Research myself and the pairing of an Audio Research Preamp and amp is ideal. 

Hi ghdprentice - Your advice has been really useful - Thanks! Especially the part about taking a weekend audio trip with my wife :) She has agreed so may in fact be the elusive audio babe. 

I will try to get a chance to listen to the AR Amp. It is amazing how much of the sound comes from the preamp. Do you think solid state AR will be OK (if they even make those?). Auditioning the JC5 this week - wonder what your thoughts are on that amp with an ARC pre? Thanks again.

Thank you for your kind words.

I think part of having great relationships is to look out for your partner while pursuing your passions. Make sure she is very happy when you go to listen to some systems. 
 

Preamps are the heart of a great system. They take really small signals and carefully amplify them. If you don’t get this right, then the sound coming out will not sound great.

Audio Research tried to transition to solid state. They have had some great sounding solid state components when they were introduced but ultimately went back to tubes. They have a very strong commitment to reproducing music… not designing to fads or flashy sound. So, I think everything is now tubed. And I have auditioned or owned a lot. It is what I choose. Many folks are looking for a different sound. There are lots of companies catering to those sounds.

I personally have become more and more committed to ARC equipment. It embodies what I want in sound quality. Other people want different things. I recommend listening to an all ARC system, and an all MAC, and all Pass. Chose the one you are drawn to. Then over time bring that together. I looked at the JC5… looks like a very fast and powerful amp. My guess is less fleshed out and musical than an ARC. See, what listening says to you… drawn in? Or does it jump out and shout at you. Which do you prefer.

Audio 

That is indeed what drew us away from the mac - simply asking what we wanted to sit back and enjoy. Thanks for looking into the JC5. It is on its way so we will see. I will follow your advice and try to hear an all ARC on the road. That will mean used ARC but nothing wrong with that. Appreciate your time and comments beyond technology.