There is a 2 ohm output connection onback of amp.
is it ok or advantageous to use 4 ohm connection?
is it ok or advantageous to use 4 ohm connection?
361 responses Add your response
Since the output transformers allow for 2 4 or 8 ohmHas to do with "output impedance" of said transformer tap. (damping factor) into the speakers impedance to control the speaker cone movement, and getting the "most wattage" without losing control for that speaker driver. The lower the transformer tap the lower the "output impedance" the higher the "damping factor", penalty is the lower the tap the lower the wattage also. Cheers George |
"
Greatfull dead/Jerry Garcia’s Favorite McIntosh 2300 Amplifiers weren’t owned by them, and were owned by nobody they’re worth around 3K. https://www.ebay.com/itm/363362695974" That would be the "Grateful Dead" and the link you posted was an amp for sale, not one that has sold. All amps in the auction sold, I do think at silly prices, however just pointing out. The value to one may not be the value to others. |
you want to drive a lower impedance speaker than the amp is designed for.Not for me, sorry Abraxalito, you get the right amp, not put a band-aid on it Another good reason is that you have a much higher power amp than you need -Not into speakers EPDR low bass impedances, again, you get the right amp, not put a band-aid on it, it’s like bridging if you need more power, wrong. You get the right amp. No hate for McIntosh amps here.Greatfull dead/Jerry Garcia’s Favorite McIntosh 2300 Amplifiers weren’t owned by them, and were owned by nobody they’re worth around 3K. https://www.ebay.com/itm/363362695974 Cheers George |
But there is no good reason to put an output transformer on a "good" solid state amplifier, it can only make it’s performance worse. If 'performance' means THD numbers then yeah I would agree. However if 'performance' means SQ then I can think of a good reason - you want to drive a lower impedance speaker than the amp is designed for. Another good reason is that you have a much higher power amp than you need - the trafo will improve the dynamics in such an instance. If you don't believe me George you could ask Nige at DIYA he's built a battery-fed LM3886 amp with multi-tapped transformers on the output - they are part of the volume control. |
No hate for McIntosh amps here. https://www.sothebys.com/en/buy/auction/2021/from-the-vault-property-from-the-grateful-dead-and-friends?locale=en |
Why the hate for mcintosh amps? MC275 tube amps were great amps. But there is no good reason to put an output transformer on a "good" solid state amplifier, it can only make it’s performance worse. It’s a bit like using auto-formers on otl tube amps that can’t drive speakers well without them. Cheers George |
This discussion seems to quickly lose rational basis, so going back to the original question, "why don't people like McIntosh?", some rational reasons not to like it are as follows: 1) Value - at the surface, it is expensive compared to most similar products with similar specs. 2) Looks - if you don't like the McIntosh look, you don't like it - what is there to debate here? 3) Sound Quality - again - this is a matter of personal taste. If you don't like the way it sounds, why would you buy it? 4) Build Quality - the quality of the components, how those components are put together, and the QA/QC that ensures the consistency of what was intended by the designers vs. what ends-up in the box you buy. In my recent experience, McIntosh is not as good at this as they once were in this regard. Conversely, some reasons to like it: 1) Value - when you consider the substantial resale value (should you decide to upgrade within McIntosh or try something else later) it is typically a better "investment" than most brands. 2) Looks - see above - my own polling on this over the years has shown that most think it looks very cool, retro, and "pro" - males and females both. This criteria should be irrelevant, but most of us are at least partially moved by this element. 3) Sound Quality - this is pure personal preference - do not make any significant audio purchase without listening for yourself, and try to do so in an environment that mimics your home listening room to the greatest extent possible. That said, in my experience, at least as many people like the sound of McIntosh as dislike it. 4) Build Quality - while it may not be what it once was, it is still very good for the most part - especially once you are in the stainless steel chassis line of products. I hope this helps. There is no "fatal-flaw" in buying McIntosh, unless you listen to it, don't like the sound, and then buy it anyway. Conversely, if you like the sound, there are few brands of equipment that have enjoyed lasting value and performance over the decades the way McIntosh has. |
@jerryrocks- Mendoza line is used as a reference to a cut off point. Mario Mendoza hit about .200 which got referenced as a minimum average for a major league hitter. I use it as a minimum quality of the looks of a piece of equipment. If it passes, then the differentiating factor is SQ. Of course equipment manufacturers invest in the looks of their gear, but only the MacIntoshes and the like expect it to be a differentiating factor. I just mentioned interior designers as an extreme example, I would think everyone has their own Mendoza line of visual appeal and I hope audiophiles select the best value of SQ and don’t let nice aesthetics overtake something of better SQ/value for the dollar. The biggest value hit recipient would be a MacIntosh buyer who keeps the meters off. Like a previous poster said, why not have it as an option and the deleters save a few bucks? Anything that measures something and is somehow attached to it impacts its performance in theory. Whether it is audible or not is debatable. |
Now, I have no problem with this if that is important to you, which is why I asked if you are an interior designer. I would expect them to care very much about the looks, perhaps even beyond the SQ a piece of equipment delivers. I am sure that those people kept B&O afloat for a while and is a major contributor to MacIntosh’s undisputed success and popularity.@sokogear There are so many holes in your 'logic' it is hard to know where (or if) to begin. But here goes.. Why would aesthetics not matter? Name one manufacturer that does not care and invest in this aspect of their product, electronics or otherwise. Calling our interior designers as the only ones who care about aesthetics is absurd. Most everyone cares about visual appeal. B&O and Mac are in two different leagues. Enough said there. Mendoza line refers to a baseball analogy. Perhaps you meant Maginot line. And as to the blue meters.They have no impact on sound quality and you can always turn them off. At least on my C2300 you can. |
@fenmoore12 - logic dictates that in circumstances where a piece of equipment sounds better than another but less money was spent on improving the looks (or adding unnecessary, sound degrading meters) and the cost is lower than an inferior sounding one that looks nicer and costs more, you would take the inferior sounding one (at times).- Here is the logic: let's say you set aside a fixed amount of money (or had points to spend and couldn't use any leftover points for anything else) for a new box and the nicer looking one of the two under consideration costs exactly that amount of $$ or points and the better sounding one costs a little less. I am assuming that you want to maximize the value of the dollars that you spend. If you don't buy the nicer looking one, you will leave money or points on the table, whereas a person only concerned with the SQ (assuming as I mentioned in a previous post, it is not hideous and disallowed by the boss in her den) will buy the less expensive one because it sounds better. This is theoretical of course, but demonstrates the error of an audiophile putting beauty ahead (or a major consideration in relation to) of SQ. Now, I have no problem with this if that is important to you, which is why I asked if you are an interior designer. I would expect them to care very much about the looks, perhaps even beyond the SQ a piece of equipment delivers. I am sure that those people kept B&O afloat for a while and is a major contributor to MacIntosh's undisputed success and popularity. People's Mendoza line for acceptance of looks varies from person to person, but IMHO, it should be a yes or no proposition, and if it meets or exceeds that line, the only criteria of a serious audiophile for a piece of equipment is SQ. |
| Post removed |
But since tubes are en vogue again there is a lot of junk out there on the market. The influence of the power supply is much higher with tube gear than with ss-based (pre-)amps. An improved ps will do magic if you know where to install/change capacitors either in the output stage or in the ps. My AR pre now shows all the virtues of a modern construction, but still with the magic only tubes can do- decay, resolution, soundstage, imaging. I will definitely not go back to transistorized preamps. |
My med. doctor had an MC2105 and a C29. When I saw the C29 for the first time, i knew that some day I would go for this. What a look! A real gem. And one day my local dealer displayed one in his showcase. After 8 or 9 weeks of sneaking around it was still there and I dared asking for a reasonable price- and I got it! It was my holy grail for two years or so when I bit by bit realized it did not offer that kind of sound I had always been looking for. The sound was integral, nothing excelled. Good mids, the bass strong but a little rounded, but a lack of decay, resolution and detail. I suspect the developers intended to find a successor for their tube gear that would do no harm to the listener's ears, but so they created amps that would deliver a rounded sound lacking impact and deep dimension picture in the high and upper mid frequencies. So finally I sold the C29 to a friend. A review in an audiophile magazine had the verdict "good" for the C29 (but a "very good" for the contemporary Audio Research preamp)…funny enough, 30 years later I got an AR tube pre that is still in my line-up and delivers all the rich sound that I want. It is carefully tweaked and gives me everything I missed with the C29. McIntosh of today? I dislike the green lights as much as I loved the turquoise lights. I think the magical look has vanished with this change. No reason to get one... Jan |
To me, the hate is unjustified (unless the price is concerned). Sometime ago I replaced my tube integrated in my main system with a Macintosh solid state amplifier the sound clarity was obvious vs the tube amp. Then I replaced the McIntosh with another SS power amp and a preamp with the total cost of about the double. I didn't use the McIntosh for some years since then. Recently i have hooked it up in my second system. Is the SQ twice worse than that in my main system? Not really, in fact the differences are not that huge. The base sounds good and natural, piano is also fine, instrument separation is really good, high frequencies are also ok. Perhaps it lacks a bit the body, still the soundstage is not really flat. The built quality is good and it has a lot of features. Do i like the blue illumination? No, but I have it off. The balance works perfectly well, doesn't get hot ever. For me, the SQ is not luxurious but it is more than decent and stable. Now I am no longer sure if I have to sell it. |
Let me quote myself so hopefully it becomes clear. "If, to me, there is no discernible difference in sound between components (preamp, amp, speaker, etc.) I will always choose the one with better visual appearance and craftsmanship.” How do you infer by logic that I mean lower sound quality? I clearly stated that if there is no discernible difference in sound between components I will choose the one that has better visual appearance. I have no idea how that equals selection of inferior sound quality. I love the gate keepers on this forum. Even questions about what people do for a living in order to attack their comments. Who cares what I do for a living. Why in the hell is that even important? |
If, to me, there is no discernible difference in sound between components (preamp, amp, speaker, etc.) I will always choose the one with better visual appearance and craftsmanship. I will even pay more for the better looking component and better craftsmanship all other parameters being equal. If that means I get pretty blue meters in the purchase, so be it. |
If you flip a switch, they are line stage. Flaw, I don’t think so. Either or in all their new gear.. Some people think line stage means volume only, not even a balance. I personally wouldn’t own just a line stage. The closest I have ever owned is a Krell HT and it had sub and bass management. The other 15+ preamps I own ALL have tone control, maybe 5 or 6 have tone control bypass. Sure nice having tone control breaking in things.. Cables, speakers and the like.. A little tweak until things settle down a bit. I stay at + 1 to -1 on the bass. Crap CDs get a treble adjustment every now and then.. Regards |