|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Model: | MC162 |
Category: | Amplifier (SS) |
Suggested Retail Price: | $2200 |
Description: | 160 wattsX2 into 4 Ohms and 100 wattsX2 into 8 Ohms |
Manufacturer URL: | McIntosh |
Review by navman (A) on December 25, 2002 at 15:05:42 IP Address: 24.117.139.148 | Add Your Review for the MC162 |
Firstly, I am not good with audiophile terminology. I will try and get my impressions across in "bumble speak!"After hearing tube equipment, particularly a Dynaco 70 that I restored, the Yamaha Home Theatre receiver, had to be replaced. I always had problems trying to enjoy music I had on account of no detail at lower volumes but a hard metallic compression like sound at higher volumes. The Dynaco 70 allowed me to enjoy music once again after many years.
My quest for a good 2 channel system lead me to the McIntosh MC162. I do believe that 2 ch is dead (or dying) but when its long gone I could look at Mch and have no urge to be a pioneer. In my town high end audio is sparse store wise. Mostly there were surround receivers. I auditioned the McIntosh and took it home.
It powers my B&Ws very nicely. There is no hint of strain at any volume even when pushed. It seems to be sensitive to cables and pre-amps that are swapped in the rest of the system, and this leads me to believe it is revealing. Different albums sound very different, and I feel I am hearing what the producer recording engineer wants me to hear as opposed to the amp forcing its own tone on the proceedings.
But what I like most is that the Mac sounds "smooth" and musical. Most of the time I forget I am listening to my stereo and am involved in the music.
When listening to it I really dont care if its ss or tube. Its just music. I say this because my second system (Sony 775, ARC LS7 McIntosh MC40 monos) has a bit of the tube character, but the distinction between it and the Mc162 is not that great.
After owning the amp I really have no urge to replace it or try anything else, a feeling I seldom have had with other equipment. In fact the idea of adding a second to bi-amp my speakers might be an attractive option.
At least I still have things to tweak. Cables. I think the Mac will age well in my home.
Product Weakness: | None so far. |
Product Strengths: | Solid build. Solid convincing sound. Smooth, and lacks hardness and sounds almost tube like. The blue meters on front. |
Associated Equipment for this Review: | |
Amplifier: | McIntosh MC162 |
Preamplifier (or None if Integrated): | Marsh p2000 |
Sources (CDP/Turntable): | Sony SCD333ES |
Speakers: | B&W603 S2 |
Cables/Interconnects: | Monster Ref II, Z1 |
Music Used (Genre/Selections): | Blues, rock, classical |
Room Comments/Treatments: | None |
Time Period/Length of Audition: | 6 months |
Other (Power Conditioner etc.): | Monster HTS 1000 |
Type of Audition/Review: | Product Owner |
Follow Ups:
Nice to see a review of this venerable amp here! I've owned the McIntosh Labs MC162 for over a year, and when all was said and done after initially auditioning many amps in the 2K price range (give or take a few hundred), I took the 162 home as well to drive my Magnepans. I've been loving it since! It is certainly a 'musical' amp in every sense of the word.Regarding your comment on 2 channel sound, it most certainly is not dead. Dying? I don't believe as quickly as some may think. Granted, there are many HT setups playing music when not on duty for playing DVD's, and most still use 2 channels for music playback. And the majority of audio only setups used to play music out there are cheaper 'all in one' shelf systems or boombox type units anyway, and these are 2 channel. Remember, most audio systems/setups out there are NOT high-end, and 2 channel reigns supreme here.
My hope is that 2 channel remains. I hope its not dying, but teh feeling is as home theatre takes over, and audio gets shifted to it, that will gradually become the norm. The other threat is compression. Unless internet bandwith is really good, I guess music will have to be compressed to be passed around/sold.But I hope 2 Channel prevails. I am certainly going to help its cause by sticking with it.
that 2-channel is dead. We went through this in the early '70s with quadraphonic sound and it did not get far. Phono cartridge design benefited somewhat from the quad technology but not much else. A very satisfactory soundstage can be created by 2-channel sound and I just don't see the masses plopping down more money than necessary for this satisfactory soundstage. Multichannel sound alone (all things being equal) is not adding much in the way of a sonic benefit. A slightly different sonic perspective but no increase in purity of tone, immediacy or realism.There will always be companies trying to sell 2-channel for the cost benefit and as long as the quality remains, this 2-channel will remain.
First and foremost I hope 2 Channel stays around but I'm not so sure? When SACD first came out, I really thought for sure that this combined with Home Theater would be the demise of the pure two channel systems. Now with the lack luster support of SACD by most manufactures and recording manufactures I'm a little more optimistic. However, it seems that the majority of the consumer market has really swung over to home theater set ups; especially in the low to mid fi equipment. As a manufacture, this is where the demand is and the overall profit margins. Perhaps not at the unit level, but certainly when volumn is concerned. As time goes by and more HI-End users start to dabble into H.T. the product demand for Hi-End H.T. electronics will increase. Three Manufactures that come to mind that are already into H.T. knee deep Krell, Sunfire, Anthem (I saw ads for H.T. Pre-Amps in Sound & Vision). Krell has moved the intire Kav series except the 300i over to H.T.). Good bad or indifferent Krell is one of a few manufactures that set standards for Hi-Fi S.S. electronics.In my opinion, as consumers look for more intergration in products such as stereos and theater, this is the direction that Hi-Fi will be forced to follow. Another thought, I'm willing to bet that the reason SACD hasn't caught on with manufactures may be that future plans may include music and movies in an MP3 format???? I don't know? Perhaps their is technology out there that can efficiently produce source material in a downloadable format that at leat equals Compact Discs? Just think about the cost savings in this for the manufactures if they could pull this off!!
Will 2 channel die off completely? I don't think so. I would be willing to bet that 2 channel will go the way of LPs and Tube equipment. This means that you will have fewer manufactures to select from as the demand won't be there for the 2 channel products.
I don't profess to be an expert, just my best educated guess.
What do you think?
Regards
There are supposed to be more tube amplifier manufacturers in the World than there ever has been. These may not be mass marketed, but are probably much higher quality with better customer service.We will all probably die before 2 channel is dead!
Cut-Throat
I am encouraged by the optimism. I truly had given up on 2CH lasting for very long (10 yrs at best), but am starting to look at the possibility it may survive.
Here are you guy? The best LP front ends and the best tube equipment is now being built! If 2 channel goes that way, you are in for a treat.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: