McIntosh MC275 Amplifiers
McIntosh MC275 Amplifiers
USER REVIEWS
[Oct 01, 2000]
Klaus Mathisen
Audiophile
Strength:
Good sound (when it works), classic looks.
Weakness:
Hopeless ergonomics (i.e. speaker terminals), rotten reliability, technical backup. I bought the Norwegian imprter's demo MC275 (reissue version), and after approx. 18 months it started to produce extreme distortion in both channels. I've got three different sets of outout tubes, so it isn't. that. I returned it to the importer's, and they kept it for four weeks without managing to repair it. So now it just sits there, waiting for me to get the courage to sling it and try to forget about it. Similar Products Used: McIntosh C22, Accuphase DP-65, Sonus Faber Extrema |
[Nov 17, 2000]
Ed
Audiophile
Strength:
Not the most detailed of amps, but enough detail to satisfy all music lovers except for the most hard-core audiophiles (or solid-state freaks). Lush, warm, sweet, deep, wide, focused, non-fatiguing and authoritative (especially in mono). Unlike some solid-state Macs, it doesn't lose transparancy when bridged into mono mode. Enough power and current (as monoblocks) to drive a Martin Logan CLS Z 2. Oh yes, and damn sexy looking!
Weakness:
Doesn't possess state-of-the-art bass control, but highly improved when bridged and used as monoblocks. Not as good as the McIntosh MC 2000 (what is?) I bought my amp in 1995 or 1996 and it drove my Proac Response 3 beautifully. I felt that compared to my ARC, it was more liquid and sweeter. Don't know if you can call it coloured, but I found myself drawned into the music so much more. Bass wasn't as deep or tight as most solid-state amps I've heard, but I could live with it. Although it had 75 watts, I never heard it clip. Similar Products Used: Too many to name, but principly Audio Research Classic 120s and Mark Levinson 27. |