Quantcast

How About Mcintosh6900?

MartinLogan Owners (MLO)

Help Support MartinLogan Owners (MLO):

K

krit2510

Guest
How about Mcintosh 6900 :rolleyes: ( 200watt 2/4/8 ohms ) to drive My Ascent i?
Please recommend.

I think Krell 400xi is too small for my Ascent.
 

MarkNewbie

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Location
Indiana
Like I said in another post...not a fan of the integrated stuff. I am however, a MAC fan. But, if you are dead set on doing the integrated thingy, I would go with the krell. I think it has more beef than the MAC and you might last a year before you wanted to upgrade to seperates. With the MAC, you might last 6 months before you wanted to upgrade. With the Ascents you want good power to drive them. My advice would be to hold out and buy seperates. There are a lot of great choices out there outside of the integrated realm. Another thing...home demo as much as you can.
 

attyonline

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
350
Reaction score
1
I would get the Mac. Its very well made, sounds good and easy to sell for good money if you decide to get something else. If you can buy used, Krell integrateds are all over ebay and audiogon at good prices. Tells you something about the product IMO, and it will save you money over buying new.
 

miljac

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
246
Reaction score
0
Location
Germany
I heard the Ascents with 6900 - it was a demo when I decided to go for Ascent - and McIntosh. Fabulous. Just make sure you've invested in a very good front end - the amp/speakers can reveal so much ...
 
O

ovature

Guest
Mac

I use the Mac c2200 pre-amp and MC 402 400 watt amp. It works great with my SL 3s
 

DTB300

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
2,146
Reaction score
0
Location
Fallout 3 Land
It should drive it ok. Just make sure you are ok with the MAC sound - meaning make sure you listen to it before purchasing.

Personally MAC gear does not do it for me.

Dan
 
O

ovature

Guest
DTB300 said:
It should drive it ok. Just make sure you are ok with the MAC sound - meaning make sure you listen to it before purchasing.

Personally MAC gear does not do it for me.

Dan
Once you've owned MAC separates with high power you realize how lousy most of the other so called high end brands sound. The Levinson and Krell stuff I had was garbage; all of it. Mac works particularly well with digital and is the opposite of bright or analytical. Too bad you haven't heard it sounding right. AND THE SEPARATES SOUND MUCH BETTER THAN THE INTEGRATED PRODUCTS THEY MAKE.
 

attyonline

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
350
Reaction score
1
ovature said:
Once you've owned MAC separates with high power you realize how lousy most of the other so called high end brands sound. The Levinson and Krell stuff I had was garbage; all of it. Mac works particularly well with digital and is the opposite of bright or analytical. Too bad you haven't heard it sounding right. AND THE SEPARATES SOUND MUCH BETTER THAN THE INTEGRATED PRODUCTS THEY MAKE.
I tend to agree. My brother in law was set on getting a Krell 200 wpc amp to match his pre and CD setup and a nice one was on sale used at my local dealer. We listened on Aeon i speakers with a tube Mac pre and Carey audio cd player to the Krell (S model I think, about 5 yrs old) and a Mac 402. I thought the Mac much better in every area but the bass, which the Krell might have had a small edge. The Mac sounded natural and clear in the mids and highs while I thought the Krell was bit etched and two dimensional. Not great differences to be sure, but I preferred the Mac. My brother in law did not and bought the Krell.
 

DTB300

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
2,146
Reaction score
0
Location
Fallout 3 Land
ovature said:
Once you've owned MAC separates with high power you realize how lousy most of the other so called high end brands sound. The Levinson and Krell stuff I had was garbage; all of it. Mac works particularly well with digital and is the opposite of bright or analytical. Too bad you haven't heard it sounding right. AND THE SEPARATES SOUND MUCH BETTER THAN THE INTEGRATED PRODUCTS THEY MAKE.
No need to yell there sport.....

High power, low power, seperates, integrated, whatever...I still do not like it, and it does not matter if you like it, or the rest of the world likes it. I do not, so I will not own it. And yes, I have heard MAC stuff in many different settings, with many different components (all MAC with many different models, mixed with MAC stuff), different cables & IC's, vinyl and digital, and many different speakers, over and over, just to confirm what I have heard, and to this day, I still do not like it.

That is what makes this hobby so great. So many different things to choose from - tube, SS, digital, vinyl, etc. etc. and each of our opinions are just that...opinions.....and everyone needs to get out and listen to gear and make their own judgements. This is the point you completely missed with my post.

Just as you do not like the new ML line, I do not like MAC stuff.

Dan
 
Last edited:
O

ovature

Guest
DTB300 said:
No need to yell there sport.....

High power, low power, seperates, integrated, whatever...I still do not like it, and it does not matter if you like it, or the rest of the world likes it. I do not, so I will not own it. And yes, I have heard MAC stuff in many different settings, with many different components (all MAC with many different models, mixed with MAC stuff), different cables & IC's, vinyl and digital, and many different speakers, over and over, just to confirm what I have heard, and to this day, I still do not like it.

That is what makes this hobby so great. So many different things to choose from - tube, SS, digital, vinyl, etc. etc. and each of our opinions are just that...opinions.....and everyone needs to get out and listen to gear and make their own judgements. This is the point you completely missed with my post.

Just as you do not like the new ML line, I do not like MAC stuff.

Dan
Right..............I HATE the new Logan Line, Summit, Vantage, and Vista and really like McIntosh. I don't like the looks of the Mac gear, but I like the sound. I think my SL3 blows away the Vista or that Vantage piece of garbage with the paper thin veneer; nothing more than a panel mounted to an ugly box with or without a little worthless amp!
 

jjqiv

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
355
Reaction score
0
Location
Los Gatos, CA
ovature said:
Right..............I HATE the new Logan Line, Summit, Vantage, and Vista and really like McIntosh. I don't like the looks of the Mac gear, but I like the sound. I think my SL3 blows away the Vista or that Vantage piece of garbage with the paper thin veneer; nothing more than a panel mounted to an ugly box with or without a little worthless amp!
Wow! What a critique! You should apply for a position at one of the audio rags!

I listened to the Summits with HT gear and thought they showed potential. I would have to bring them home for an audition in my two channel rig before make any real judgements. Did you do this?

B.T.W., What is your system number in the memeber's section?
 
O

ovature

Guest
jjqiv said:
Wow! What a critique! You should apply for a position at one of the audio rags!

I listened to the Summits with HT gear and thought they showed potential. I would have to bring them home for an audition in my two channel rig before make any real judgements. Did you do this?

B.T.W., What is your system number in the memeber's section?
Everytime I try to post my system, it won't take the photos because they are too large. I took the vantage and vista home. They sounded hyped on the high end and the bass sounded like juke boxes on the bottom; same thing I heard in the store. I heard the Summit at 3 locations. It was the best of the bunch, but to me the woofer integration is the worst so far. It sounds like a panel mounted to a powered sub. The microperf claim is nothing but marketing BS. The protegy sounded just as big and I think the Ascent I was one of their best sounding reasonably priced speakers ever. I had a pair to use for a month and I loved them. My system consists of:
ML SL3 speakers
McIntosh MC 2200 tube pre amp
McIntosh Mc-402 400/channel SS Amp
VPI Extended Aries with JMW 12.5 arm
EAR 834 Chrome phono pre-amp
Sony SCD 777es SACD player
Monster 2.4s bi-wire speaker cable
Madrigal HPC cables interconnect.
 

jjqiv

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
355
Reaction score
0
Location
Los Gatos, CA
ovature said:
Everytime I try to post my system, it won't take the photos because they are too large. I took the vantage and vista home. They sounded hyped on the high end and the bass sounded like juke boxes on the bottom; same thing I heard in the store. I heard the Summit at 3 locations. It was the best of the bunch, but to me the woofer integration is the worst so far. It sounds like a panel mounted to a powered sub. The microperf claim is nothing but marketing BS. The protegy sounded just as big and I think the Ascent I was one of their best sounding reasonably priced speakers ever. I had a pair to use for a month and I loved them. My system consists of:
ML SL3 speakers
McIntosh MC 2200 tube pre amp
McIntosh Mc-402 400/channel SS Amp
VPI Extended Aries with JMW 12.5 arm
EAR 834 Chrome phono pre-amp
Sony SCD 777es SACD player
Monster 2.4s bi-wire speaker cable
Madrigal HPC cables interconnect.
Were the demo's you brought home broken-in or new, out of the box? New panels can be bright.

I thought the Summits had good panel & woofer integration after the cross-over and volume knobs where adjusted from the 'Wow Factor' settings the store had in place for HT demo's.
 
Top