Best upgrade: amp or pre-amp?

Topic: "Best upgrade: amp or pre-amp?"

Recommendation: "Speakers" 

@papyneau - I inherited *exactly* the same rig from my father (with KEF reference series speakers)

The best first money I spent was on a DAC. Now on a Benchmark DAC3 HGC, it sounds awesome coming through those Mac pieces

You might consider having your pieces refurbished by the folks at Audio Classics in Vestal, NY (Mac specialists) - I did that for the pre & really upped the sound

Over time, the rig became a Mac C2300 (tube pre) and MC152 amp (both purchased from Audio Classics), with Harbeth Super HL5+ speakers

An intermediate step (the 2300 & 152 are about $8k together) could be a used Mac integrated

I will say, the original rig still holds up darn well (I kept my father’s pieces)

@overthemoon 

I saw the Moon products and I am certainly sensible by the "Fabriqué au Québec" touch and think you are right: I should at least give them a try. It should be way easier to try them out that other brand like Luxman and Pass that have a very few dealers in the great Montreal area.

@bassdude & the MA352 community:

I haven't considered tube so far as I know nothing virtually nothing about them and it seems they required a bit mote attention than a SS even if I acknowledge the fact that is brings something in term of AQ . However, I completely agree that the MA8950, and others integrated have way more features that I need (lots of input, EQ, DAC, ...). My use case for the  foreseeable future is the current one: one input, the Bluesound Node. This is why one of the top of my list are the Pass Labs INT-25 or INT-60: a beautiful simplicity. 

@fiesta75, @runwell , @ditusa :

My though when starting this thread was to go separate, but not for the flexibility it offers (I might be wrong, but I'm convinced I don't and will not need it). It was to spread the investment over time and ultimately end-up with a better (and probably more expensive) system. I realize it might be a form of flexibility. But I wonder how much better the AQ is considering the latest advance in integrated technology. Of couse, once again, it depends and here we are back to square 1!

@jonwatches1 

Ok, you got my attention! I'm really interested how much you considered the AQ improved by spending 8k (USD I assume, so it's 10k CAD) to replace that semi-vintage gear we have in common. I must admit, one of my worse fears is to spend that money to end-up with something equivalent (still, as opposed as you, that Mac gear is a long term lent from a good friends... that inherited the gear from his father! So I must get my own eventually). Also, when I was looking for speakers, the Harbeth were on my short list (M30.2 XD, C7ES-3 XD) but decided to go with the Focal and I really happy with them. Finally, the DAC... this one is not on my short-term concern as I might decided to go with new gear that has a good/better one included. From what I read, there are different school of though on how DAC really make a difference for the price. Eventually, I'll need to give it an honest try.

@ieales, @ditusa :

Are you suggesting the Sopra are the weakest link?

Thanks all for the  hive minds - it really helps wrapping my head are this choice I have to make!

Right now,A lot of  Hi End system use 2 chassis for  pre ONLY ,the main point is to isolate the electric noise from the circuit, not mention inside the integrated, the power is splitting into pre and amplifier. so  the integrated is confined to that level.

Except some very special  integrated ,which is total very high level design( with very high price at the same time)  and maybe two power cable in, like VAC statement 450i  iQ or ASR integrated with a lot of chassis

Are you suggesting the Sopra are the weakest link?

Absolutely.

Over exaggerated upper octave, wooly, indistinct bass, roller coaster step response, impedance and phase.

When I last looked for speakers, my exact words to the salesman:

"You’re joking, right? These are awful."