Who heard or has a McIntosh MC7100?

Well since your preamp is a hybrid with no feedback, it probably does have a highish output impedance and the 2100 has a 10x higher input impedance than the 7100 but I think that in terms of the overall affect, the lack of dynamics of the 2100 will be a far greater impact than any possible impedance mismatches you may encounter with the 7100. I bought a 2100 one one time for a ridiculous deal on ebay. It was nice, as was the 2125, but not as satisfying as the 7100 IMO. The little 7100 is really a very nice amp.

Things have changed since the 70s in terms of part quality and so the sound has effectively "cleaned up." This is one fo the first things I notice when comparing an older amp to a much newer one in the same system. It cannot really be overlooked. I will spare all the details but the upshot is that I would still suggest you would be happier with the 7100 (and you are right - it is very slick looking - like my C712). Let us know what you decide! The 2100 is indeed cheap if you want to experiment with it and see what you think - resale is not a problem with McIntoshes. Good luck! Arthur

Thanks for the good input Aball,,,,Have you listened to a Berning TF-10 pre? if yes, what did you think?

Jack

PS:Besides the sentimental and emotional want of having a Mc in my system, I wonder if in terms of SQ its not a ssideways move. My current amp is a Kineregetics Chiro C200, source is Parasound CDP-2000, and speakers are JBL L-96's

ABall, Thanks for the tip....

Jalen

I owned (for a very short time) an MC-7150 and a C-712. They were both HORRIBLE. Thick is probably the best way to describe their sound. Of course they looked gorgeous but their performance was truly lackluster.

I picked them up used (here) from their original owner as a set. They had just been to the factory for a once-over and had about $350 worth of maintenance performed, so I know that they were up to spec and in proper operating condition.

Compared to the Classe DR-9 and Sonic Frontiers SFL-1 that they replaced, they were dreadful.

The MC-7100 is the same amp as the MC-7150 minus 50 watts and the cool meters. I would follow the advice regarding the older "2" series with the autoformers. I believe that the "7" series was produced during the transition period after being purchased by Clarion.

Good luck.

Again, it depends what type of sound you like. Some people don't like McIntosh, just like some people don't like ML, don't like Classe, don't like ARC, don't like Pass Labs, etc... To each his own. Gullahisland is proof that you need to audition for yourself.

As an alternate note, Gullahisland is totally wrong about the 7100 being the same as the 7150. They probably sound similar but the topology is quite different between the two since the 7150 has autoformers and the 7100 is direct-coupled. The 7100 was derived from the 7200 actually and the 7150 from the 7270.

Another correction is that the 7xxx series began before Clarion even came into the picture. The 7270 came out in 1985 and Clarion bought McIntosh in 1990. The inital design stage for the 7xxx series probably began in the early 1980s so this argument is out the window.

In addition, Clarion, per McIntosh employees I have spoken with at length (they are really cool guys and will just chat on the phone with you), did basically nothing to McIntosh. In other words, things didn't change and the designs continued as they would have normally but they got more money to build things like a better anechoic chamber and testing equipment. The Japanese essentially worship McIntosh and so Oyamada saw it like a feather in his hat when he bought the company.

I think that is the end of the corrections so far. Anyway, experiment and see if Mc suits your tastes. As Gullah says, If you want thin sound, then Mc won't be for you....

Yours truly,
The Mc Crusader ;)