McIntosh C50 vs C2500 ? ....

joeinid

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 4, 2013
Messages
18,719
Location
NY
Has anyone compared these two preamps for sound quality? I am curious which one you think sounds better. I like the tone control functions of the C50 which is a little different than the ones on the C2500.

XL_C50_D.jpg


XL_C2500_Front_Top.jpg
 
Joe, I've listened to the C2300 vs. the C50. I think the biggest difference between the C2300 and the C2500 is the built in DAC on the C2500. Also, when I auditioned them the C50 wasn't capable of playing 24/192 files. Both preamps were connected to MC601's and the source was an MCD500.

The C2300 had that nice tube sound. Rich, full sounding music that is associated with tubes. Very nice airy highs and good bass along with a sweet midrange. The MC601's delivered the speed and punch and the C2300 gave the music life. The C50 didn't quite have the openness but the bass was definitely tighter and more impactful. Surprisingly, the two didn't sound that much different.

I went into this thinking that I would easily pick the C2300 over the C50, being a tube guy, but after listening to both of them I wasn't so sure. I really liked the C50 and everything it brought to the table in terms of connectivity and useful functions. I really like the looks of the C50 with the EQ knobs on the front of the unit. If I remember correctly the C2300 has EQ functionality as well but you need access the remote to get to them. I wish I could have heard the C50 with tube amps. I think that would be a good combo. Like I said earlier the C50 didn't have the ability to play hi-res files but I believe that is fixed now. I also see that the C2500 has a built in DAC which brings the two units even closer to one another.

I almost hate to say it, but if I was buying one of these today I would go with the C50.
 
Wow!

Thank you Doug. I really appreciate your detailed description. I am not sure what I will do but I will probably give one a try.
 
Doug has a good point however I seen numerous ppl trade their C50 to C2300 but not a single C2300 owner did. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Doug has a good point however I seen numerous ppl trade their C50 to C2300 but not a single C2300 owner did. :)

Paul that's a very good point. I wonder though how many of those sales were due to the C50 Hi-Res file issue. I think McIntosh PO'd many customers with the, what seemed like, broken promises of a firmware update. How many ditched their C50's for C2300's and an outboard DAC? It would be interesting if there was a way to know.
 
I think the C2500 might be worth a try. Argh! More research.
 
I compared the C-2300 to the C-2500 last June. Using an analog source, I found that I liked the C-2500 sound better. It seemed to be more relaxed and airy. Plus you get a reasonable DAC and phono stage built in.

I think the C2500 might be worth a try. Argh! More research.
 
Joe,

Love my c50...but would like to hear the c2500 too. My c50 was upgraded to the latest firmware with out any issue. It now plays hi Rez 36/192k via USB. The EQ feature is an helpful tweek at times. Let me know which direction you choose.
 
Hi Ron,

I have some major system changes coming. Stay tuned.
 
Joe... You might going to missed the EQ knobs on C2500. However what about this ? Do you want to miss this on C50 ??? :P

mcintosh_audio_munich_new_munich_2013_show_highend_high_end_report_matej_isak_mono_and_stereo_sonus_faber_olympica_devialet_new_test_review_matej_isak_mono_and_stereo_3.jpg
 
That is a beautiful photo Paul. I like it. I may have to give the C2500 a spin.
 
Back
Top