What McIntosh Amp With Thiel 3.6 Speakers?

I am very familiar with the Thiel / Mcintosh combination when I first bought my cs6 I was using a mc300 they produced a reasonably good synergy or so I thought until I bought a mc500 "what a difference" and then I upgraded my cables originaly I was using Nordost red dawn's I upgraded to spm's and the whole thing came together you know soundstage , balance from top to bottom and now I am sporting Valhalla's and I can say I could not be happier Good luck

I would highly recommend the MC-352. The 3.6's are not easy to drive and the 350 watts that MC-352 provides is just what you need. I had a chance to hear the 3.6's with Mark Levison No 335 and found the combination too cold and edgy. When plugged the MAC, the sound was transformed: smooth, musical, liquid and very dynamic. The Thiels tend to be a little bright in the upper mids and the Mac's smooth, rich almost tube-like midrange tonality really helped to tame things down. Great synergy. The same can be said about the MC352 and B&W Nautilus series, particularly 802 and 801 that also tend to emphasize the upper mids/lower treble and really require a serious amount of quality watts to sound their best.

I have a McIntosh MC300 connected to my Thiel 3.6's using Cardas Golden Cross cabling. I really like it. Some friends tend to think that my system is a bit bright but I don't think so. I am sitting a bit close to the speakers so this probably has something to do with it. I think people either love Thiels or hate them.....I love them. I will say this about the McIntosh/Thiel combo, the mids are just a bit thin. I borrowed my bother in-law's Classe 300 and the mids filled out somewhat. I had his amp in my system for about two weeks and then went back to my Mac. There was a definite difference, but I can't say that I preferred the Classe. I sat back and listened with my Mac back in my system and it was like returning to a very comfortable easy chair. I thought about changing amps but to this day I still have my Mac. It's always hard to give up that comfy easy chair.

We are Mac dealers - so let me prefix this resopnse with that statement.

Definitely do not drive the Thiel's with anything less than a MC-352. For two reasons - one power rating, and two autoformers. The MC-352 is the smallest amp Mac makes with autoformers, and they really help on speakers with erratic impedance such as the Thiel's. The autoformers effectively add impedance to the circuit which makes the speakers easier to drive and less onerous on the amplifier in terms of current demands, even when the speaker's impedance dips. Also you need raw horsepower to drive those speakers, particularly current. The higher up you go on the chain of Mac amps, the better off you will be sonically. The MC-352 is a great sounding amp and a very capable one at that. But frankly with your Thiel's you could enjoy better sound by moving up to the 652. You don't _need_ to, but it would be worth auditioning. I think you would find the improvement over the 352 significant.

Mitcheft is correct in his discription of MC-300. I used to own it myself before I upgraded to the MC-352. Although it may look like the amps should be similar, they are totally different in character. The MC-300 is a bit brighter in the upper mids and the treble, sort of glitzy, nice, but not perfect. The mids are nice but are a little higher pitched than the rich mids of the MC-352. MC-352 has beautiful, nicely resolved treble, a little recessed upper mids, rich and refined midrange, great bass with excellent extension and control. Both are wonderful amps, but MC-352 is a much better unit. It walks all over its older brother in transparency, dynamics, bottom end extension and control. At the same time it's lush and musical, never sterile or uninvolving. The bigger MC-602 is very similar and I really don't think it's worth the price difference, and I can't imagine any speakers that would significantly benefit from from such increase in power. The 350 watts of the MC-352 should be more than enough to drive even the toughest loads.