McIntosh mc2KW

Mike
The only times I have spent any time listening to the 2KW's is through 2K speakers. It is really difficult to form a opinion based on those sessions. For someone who has a Mac set-up they would be the pinnacle amps in my mind.
 
Mike said:
Yes, I've been talking to friends who are very familiar with them and one who owns them and they said they definitely have the old Mc signature sound. I much prefer the new Mc sound (601/452). So, they are on hold indefinitely. I also want to see what Mc has coming out at Munich.

I love my 601/2500 (with Tesla tubes) combo. So did Ian (MadFloyd). If it ain't broke....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...


Mike maybe in the next year or so Mcintosh will update or introduce a new 1.2K or MC2KW to match the newer sound from the MC601's? .......who knows.....
 
volks said:
Mike maybe in the next year or so Mcintosh will update or introduce a new 1.2K or MC2KW to match the newer sound from the MC601's? .......who knows.....
Click to expand...

That's what Joe and I keep talking about. The 601's are amazing. Love the sound.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
I've heard them, with a pair of Snell A7 Illusions. The guy who had them also paired them up with two MC303's and we ran a comparison. I much preferred two MC303's to to MC2KW's. We never got close to pushing either setup to their limits, but the 2KW was less resolving IMHO. Not sure why, but it just didn't have the top-end clarity the 303's did. It did have a bit more firm grasp of the low-end, but it was really any clearer. In fact, all I could think about was how much better the 303's sounded. Crazy price difference too!

Bryan


Mike said:
Is there anyone out there who has actually heard these amps? How do they compare to say the 1.2kw and 601's?

Curious.

View attachment 5837

View attachment 5838
Click to expand...
 
I liked the 601's too, but for me, once I heard my Sasha's on Boulder I couldn't go back. They did have a ton of authority (very powerful yet efficient), and talk about super cool. You could put your hand on them after driving them really hard without being worried about getting cooked. Can't say that for a lot of other amps out there that are class AB. I do kind of miss those pretty blue meters sometimes though. Between them and MC303's, they are McIntosh's best products.

What are you driving with your 601's Mike? Your Alexias??

Mike said:
That's what Joe and I keep talking about. The 601's are amazing. Love the sound.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...
 
radioactive said:
I liked the 601's too, but for me, once I heard my Sasha's on Boulder I couldn't go back. They did have a ton of authority (very powerful yet efficient), and talk about super cool. You could put your hand on them after driving them really hard without being worried about getting cooked. Can't say that for a lot of other amps out there that are class AB. I do kind of miss those pretty blue meters sometimes though. Between them and MC303's, they are McIntosh's best products.

What are you driving with your 601's Mike? Your Alexias??
Click to expand...

Yes, my Alexia's. I bought the 601's after trading my Dad's 6700 integrated. I had no intention to be honest. But, oh boy, am I glad I did.

Boulder 1060 is an amp I would love to hear on the Alexia's. I bet it would control the big Alexia woofers like nobodies business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I heard Boulders with the Maxx 3s. Amazing control of the speaker's woofers. The top end was a little hot for my tastes, but don't think that would be a problem with the Alexias!
 
Funny, if you would have asked me twenty years ago if amps over $10,000 sound different I would have answered "probably not by much".

Yes, Boulder control is very firm. So much that I forget the levels I'm listening at. I have to keep a meter with me when I get in the mood to listen loud out of concern for my aging ears!

The MC601's would make you feel the bass more (at least in my perspective when I compared them with Boulder). They were not as "discrete" in terms of their ability to separate out the different sounds at the low end of spectrum. I guess that's why the Boulders cost significantly more; what you get for that extra money is how they can reproduce the different sounds as a coherent, singular image cleanly - and yet you can easily pick out the individual instruments that make up the whole tone. The MC601's were a bit more blunt in that perspective. I still think they're one hell of a bargain. It's hard to get that much power and performance (and design) at their price point. And I can't think of a speaker they wouldn't drive without breaking a sweat. They probably pair best with a somewhat "bright" sounding speaker and silver coated cables. Just a hunch, but the new Synergy tweeter in the Alexia's might not pair so well as it seems to be less bright than the titanium tweeters in Wilson's previous designs.

The MC601's have the "McIntosh Sound", which is very laid back, easy to listen to for long times (non-fatiguing) and generally "warm". Not tube-like, but not the other extreme of solid state which some equate to sharp and overly accurate. I really don't see this changing in their future amps. If they redesign the MC2KW, it certainly would follow in taking the MC601's to the next level in power. Hopefully they'll change the form-factor a bit too. I found the MC2KW to be more of the even older style of "McIntosh Sound", which was even further down the warm scale from where the MC601's are. Oddly, the MC303 is a bit further up to the opposite side of the MC601's on that warm scale (away from the MC2KW).

I'd keep them too Mike :)

Just my two cents.

Bryan
 
Some of you guys are like reverse audio whores -You're always looking for your next trick, except you have to pay for it. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top