Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
A few things about McIntosh need noting.
First, McIntosh is "the tube amp" in a lot of people's minds because of their appearance and because even the most uninformed know that the Jaspanese have bought most of them up. Also, because of their low distortion and wide bandwidth and low maintenance (for a tube amp), a lot of them went to commercial, industrial, and lab applications. This leads to some unwarranted assumptions. One is that the McIntosh amps were terribly well built. They were built about to the same physical standards as a Fender or Ampeg guitar amp of the day. It's all consumer/entertainment quality parts-vis-a-vis the Marantzes which were built with Ma Bell grade stuff largely. The chrome top is bent up in a simple sheet metal brake of prechromed material which was much cheaper and much less corrosion-proof than the traditional plating process applied to the fabricated part. Another is that there is high magic in there, particularly the transformers. The OPTs are probably cheaper to wind than the best quality conventional ones of the day. Although the Mac patents have all run out on their tube amp designs, there was even then Prior Art even then which would have clearly got one of the key patents thrown out and many claims of the two others minimized had someone wished to do so. The current Mac products IMO have serious faults, largely because of excessive adherence to tube amp practice, ironically. Nonetheless their (ridiculous) blue meters look neat and that's why they sell. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
The new McIntosh 275 is a different and, obviously, less expensive to
manufacture (read: cheapened) product vis-a-vis the old one. It looks like a FMIC or KornblumAmpeg reisssue of a Fender or Ampeg MI amplifier. All the circuitry is on a PCB, and the OPTs are a bifilar primary E-I lam affair which is made either inhouse or by Schumacher. A pair of Zener diodes are used for voltage offset. The original OPTs are not trivial to wind but it's more a matter of being willing to build some tooling which is nonstandard-there are photos of the original Mac winder around somewhere. They most assuredly would be cheaper to duplicate than, say, the 20-20 Peerless design. As for some of the popular high end tube amps currently in production, there's a lot of evidence that some of them are using OPTs no better than guitar amps use. No current vendor of OPTs that oI know of-at least, excluding toroids, and I would-is really selling their product on tested specifications, they're all either selling a wind to teardown or to magazine article, or wind to archive print and a lot of flowery subjective bull****. One thing about Mac, they did and do provide guaranteed specs and will make it meet them or replace or refund the box, which no one else AFAIK will. However, I think they lost a lot of engineering respect when they totally abandoned all professional markets. There's also no doubt that their current designs have a Gilbert and Sullivan quality about them; they're often silly and the basic structural design is the same as it was in the tube days. And the blue meters are ridiculous. Even if level metering belonged on a power amp, they should have followed the industry to replace the venerable vU mechanical meters with modern real time display. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roger Russell's site is nice...but he 's hardly impartial. And I
would say that more of the extant chrome chassis tube era Macs in excellent to mint condition are in Japan than here today-ones coming on to the US market tend to be cosmetically bad, modified, or detectably reworked, replated, et al. Especially the 275 which is the John Holmes model. I don't mean to disrespect Roger, but, he was the speaker guy and the speakers Mac has built did and do not have the reputation that the electronics do. And the electronics-look inside a modern Mac product and then inside a Tek oscilloscope from the 50s up through the end of the in-house-made-CRT models. True, most other High End audio fails this test as well, but for this much money, that's my expectation. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sander:
If it was cheaper or easier, a company like Audio Research would certainly use it in lieu of their partially cathode coupled circuit, which has inherent disadvantages as opposed to CFB circuits. Hint: it has to do with the physical limits of enamel copper wire. Which is why there are other insulations. There's a remarkable paper floating around by a guy who built a trifilar primary Mac amp before Mac did (!) and he used a Formvar wire, which I'm sure has been superceded since 1956. I can't remember the guy's name or I'd look it up-i think he was from Cleveland. Also I'm glad you said it--ARC isn't above rampant cost cutting either. Indeed they are probably not as well built as the Macs. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message oups.com... A few things about McIntosh need noting. First, McIntosh is "the tube amp" in a lot of people's minds because of their appearance and because even the most uninformed know that the Jaspanese have bought most of them up. Also, because of their low distortion and wide bandwidth and low maintenance (for a tube amp), a lot of them went to commercial, industrial, and lab applications. This leads to some unwarranted assumptions. One is that the McIntosh amps were terribly well built. They were built about to the same physical standards as a Fender or Ampeg guitar amp of the day. It's all consumer/entertainment quality parts-vis-a-vis the Marantzes which were built with Ma Bell grade stuff largely. The chrome top is bent up in a simple sheet metal brake of prechromed material which was much cheaper and much less corrosion-proof than the traditional plating process applied to the fabricated part. Another is that there is high magic in there, particularly the transformers. The OPTs are probably cheaper to wind than the best quality conventional ones of the day. Although the Mac patents have all run out on their tube amp designs, there was even then Prior Art even then which would have clearly got one of the key patents thrown out and many claims of the two others minimized had someone wished to do so. The current Mac products IMO have serious faults, largely because of excessive adherence to tube amp practice, ironically. Nonetheless their (ridiculous) blue meters look neat and that's why they sell. Last I heard McIntosh IS a Japanese owned company. That has been some time ago and they may have changed hands since then. They make both tubed and SS amps AFAIK. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "R" wrote in message . 1... You will have the audio equivalent of a Rolex with a lifetime warranty just like a Rolex. your lifetime or the owner's lifetime? You aren't teetering on the verge of death, are you? |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Last I heard McIntosh IS a Japanese owned company. That has been some time ago and they may have changed hands since then. They make both tubed and SS amps AFAIK. They were owned by Clarion and it's my understanding they were sold to another Asian firm. Nonetheless, I'm sure they had no desire ever to do another tube box and it was only a corporate mandate from on high that got Binghamton going in that direction. My "beef" is simply that the reissue 275 is a cheapened and Kornblumized copy of the old one with reduced build cost and less functionality at a ridiculous price. Marantz outsourced their reissue boxes and in my opinion did a lot better job of it-they're just like the old ones warts and all. At what Mac is charging there would have been no problem exactly duplicating the original, with a better-rustproofed top cover and modern caps and resistors. Many other High End companies do a better job of physical construction than does Mac today, although not exactly to Vollum Tek standards. How much extra does this kind of construction cost? Forget chassis hogged from stainless billet, Tek never did that. The cool ceramic terminal strips? Silver is cheaper today than it has been, in inflation adjusted dollars, in a long long time-a roll of 2% silver Kester cored solder costs $16 a pound roll vis-a-vis $13 for 63/36 eutectic. |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Clyde Slick" wrote in :
"R" wrote in message . 1... You will have the audio equivalent of a Rolex with a lifetime warranty just like a Rolex. your lifetime or the owner's lifetime? You aren't teetering on the verge of death, are you? Owner's lifetime. If I had nothing else to do, I would build one just for the heck of it. The only problem with building a tube amp with Tektronix ceramic strips, etc. is that there are very few suitable strips left. Many of them are contaminated. While cleaing is a possibility, to do a proper job would be time consuming. If the glazing is crazed or cracked due to age, then the strip could not be used. r |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
It wouldn't be impossible to have a run made. Tek might even let you
have prints. |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Rich.Andrews wrote: snip Mc is owned by DM holdings. The 'D' stands for Denon and the 'M' stands for Marantz. One big happy family. My "beef" is simply that the reissue 275 is a cheapened and Kornblumized copy of the old one with reduced build cost and less functionality at a ridiculous price. Marantz outsourced their reissue boxes and in my opinion did a lot better job of it-they're just like the old ones warts and all. At what Mac is charging there would have been no problem exactly duplicating the original, with a better-rustproofed top cover and modern caps and resistors. Actually the current 275 is better than the original. Reduced functionality? Are you possibly referring to the withdrawl sic ;-) of support for impedances other than 16, 8 and 4 ohms? Yep. You may not need it. Sombody did-many were sold for that reason in fact. It certainly looks like it has the same functionality. Volume controls, power switch, output power strip. Certainly produces the same power and has all the same capabilities. The transformers are still wound in Binghamton, it is still assembled there too. They are a very different xfmr. Indeed Mac will not sell them for rpl use in vintage amps although being point to point wired the circuit could be altered to take them. They are 'missing' several windings. Since suitable C-cores are still available and Mac has all the tooling, prints, and indeed some of the people are the same ...it comes down to cost. 'Probably' it's a matter of $50 vs. $150 or thereabouts-don't ask where I got those numbers-saving $200 on a $4000 box. Tubes are selected by hand. Modern caps and resistors? I think if you look under that stainless chassis you will find modern parts. The ceramic sockets will not deteriorate due to age. Many other High End companies do a better job of physical construction than does Mac today, although not exactly to Vollum Tek standards. How much extra does this kind of construction cost? Forget chassis hogged from stainless billet, Tek never did that. The cool ceramic terminal strips? Silver is cheaper today than it has been, in inflation adjusted dollars, in a long long time-a roll of 2% silver Kester cored solder costs $16 a pound roll vis-a-vis $13 for 63/36 eutectic. What do see that other companies do that Mc does not? Silver may be cheaper but IIRC the solder used at Tek was 3% silver, not 2%. Tek used inexpensive aluminum frames to keep the weight down. I have not seen any new ceramic strips in quite some time. I'm just going by the Kester catalog. Other companies offer silver electronic solders ("silver solder" being a high temperature product with a melt point similar to brazing) including lead free cored wire solderable at normal temperatures. Silver being cheap today it's not freakish, but personally I'm fine with regular old 63/36 especially for tube projects-it'd be solid state power amps and regulated LV supplies that benefit most from silver bearing solders. McIntosh is always looking for feedback on their products. I suggest you call the product Manager Ron Cornelius at (650) 328-1490 and tell him what you think. Ron knows the current units as well as their legacy units. Tell him that I said "Hi!". I have discussed all this and more, in a friendly way, with Ron and Larry and a few others...I have to agree they're nice guys and all, but I'm sure they thought I was nuts. And maybe I am. But it's a kind of nuts I rather enjoy. BTW I am not an employee of McIntosh, DM Holdings or any other company even remotely assoociated with the electronics industry. I have some Mc gear for obvious reasons and I have a number of years experience servicing and designing electronics. My advice is that if you don't like a particular manufacturers product, you should not buy it, but there is no point in expressing your thoughts regarding "sour grapes". No you should build one yourself to your specs and indeed that's on my to do list. I really don't want to have to go into the magnetics business myself, if I could buy a set of opt's off the rack I would. There are a lot of other ironies of course, such as the fact that the 75/275 was the "least good sounding" of the chrometop tube Macs (in the opinion of most gullible subjective tweaks,er, tube buffs), and that the KT88 is probably a poor choice of tube if you are buying an amp for serious long term use (most new ones suck). I think in doing _reissues_ 'warts and all' is the way to go. If I were designing a new model I'd have designed one around the tubes you can get today. Hopefully DM will reflect on the favorable experience with the Marantz reissues and if they do say a 240 or a 3500, or even a MI200 (boy would the single ended Svetlana 811 variants have been great there...) |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Rich.Andrews" wrote in message ... "Clyde Slick" wrote in : "R" wrote in message . 1... You will have the audio equivalent of a Rolex with a lifetime warranty just like a Rolex. your lifetime or the owner's lifetime? You aren't teetering on the verge of death, are you? Owner's lifetime. If I had nothing else to do, I would build one just for the heck of it. The only problem with building a tube amp with Tektronix ceramic strips, etc. is that there are very few suitable strips left. Many of them are contaminated. While cleaing is a possibility, to do a proper job would be time consuming. If the glazing is crazed or cracked due to age, then the strip could not be used. I have a whole box full of those Tek ceramic strips. NOS. Anyone interested? Norm Strong |
#16
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:11:50 GMT, "normanstrong"
wrote: I have a whole box full of those Tek ceramic strips. NOS. Anyone interested? Ouch! About a year too late for my project. Kal |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"normanstrong" wrote in news:loJud.223106
$HA.43710@attbi_s01: "Rich.Andrews" wrote in message ... "Clyde Slick" wrote in : "R" wrote in message . 1... You will have the audio equivalent of a Rolex with a lifetime warranty just like a Rolex. your lifetime or the owner's lifetime? You aren't teetering on the verge of death, are you? Owner's lifetime. If I had nothing else to do, I would build one just for the heck of it. The only problem with building a tube amp with Tektronix ceramic strips, etc. is that there are very few suitable strips left. Many of them are contaminated. While cleaing is a possibility, to do a proper job would be time consuming. If the glazing is crazed or cracked due to age, then the strip could not be used. I have a whole box full of those Tek ceramic strips. NOS. Anyone interested? Norm Strong Do you have the mounting hardware for the strips too? r -- Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes. |
#18
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message oups.com... Roger Russell's site is nice...but he 's hardly impartial. And I would say that more of the extant chrome chassis tube era Macs in excellent to mint condition are in Japan than here today-ones coming on to the US market tend to be cosmetically bad, modified, or detectably reworked, replated, et al. Especially the 275 which is the John Holmes model. I don't mean to disrespect Roger, but, he was the speaker guy and the speakers Mac has built did and do not have the reputation that the electronics do. And the electronics-look inside a modern Mac product and then inside a Tek oscilloscope from the 50s up through the end of the in-house-made-CRT models. True, most other High End audio fails this test as well, but for this much money, that's my expectation. You can't compare any piece of audio gear to a Tek scope. As "R" remarks, Tektronix scopes, especially the 500, 600 and 7000 series, were built like nothing else on this planet. They are singular examples of design quality. |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#20
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Robert Morein" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... Roger Russell's site is nice...but he 's hardly impartial. And I would say that more of the extant chrome chassis tube era Macs in excellent to mint condition are in Japan than here today-ones coming on to the US market tend to be cosmetically bad, modified, or detectably reworked, replated, et al. Especially the 275 which is the John Holmes model. I don't mean to disrespect Roger, but, he was the speaker guy and the speakers Mac has built did and do not have the reputation that the electronics do. And the electronics-look inside a modern Mac product and then inside a Tek oscilloscope from the 50s up through the end of the in-house-made-CRT models. True, most other High End audio fails this test as well, but for this much money, that's my expectation. You can't compare any piece of audio gear to a Tek scope. As "R" remarks, Tektronix scopes, especially the 500, 600 and 7000 series, were built like nothing else on this planet. They are singular examples of design quality. I worked and depended on a 7904 for quite a few years. Quality is the last word that comes to mind when I think of that beast ![]() ScottW |
#21
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Robert Morein" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... Roger Russell's site is nice...but he 's hardly impartial. And I would say that more of the extant chrome chassis tube era Macs in excellent to mint condition are in Japan than here today-ones coming on to the US market tend to be cosmetically bad, modified, or detectably reworked, replated, et al. Especially the 275 which is the John Holmes model. I don't mean to disrespect Roger, but, he was the speaker guy and the speakers Mac has built did and do not have the reputation that the electronics do. And the electronics-look inside a modern Mac product and then inside a Tek oscilloscope from the 50s up through the end of the in-house-made-CRT models. True, most other High End audio fails this test as well, but for this much money, that's my expectation. You can't compare any piece of audio gear to a Tek scope. As "R" remarks, Tektronix scopes, especially the 500, 600 and 7000 series, were built like nothing else on this planet. They are singular examples of design quality. I worked and depended on a 7904 for quite a few years. Quality is the last word that comes to mind when I think of that beast ![]() ScottW |
#22
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "R" wrote in message . 1... "normanstrong" wrote in news:loJud.223106 $HA.43710@attbi_s01: "Rich.Andrews" wrote in message ... "Clyde Slick" wrote in : "R" wrote in message . 1... You will have the audio equivalent of a Rolex with a lifetime warranty just like a Rolex. your lifetime or the owner's lifetime? You aren't teetering on the verge of death, are you? Owner's lifetime. If I had nothing else to do, I would build one just for the heck of it. The only problem with building a tube amp with Tektronix ceramic strips, etc. is that there are very few suitable strips left. Many of them are contaminated. While cleaing is a possibility, to do a proper job would be time consuming. If the glazing is crazed or cracked due to age, then the strip could not be used. I have a whole box full of those Tek ceramic strips. NOS. Anyone interested? Norm Strong Do you have the mounting hardware for the strips too? Yes. There are 4 different sizes: 11, 9, 7, & 5 positions. The mounting hardware consists of little polyethylene grommets that fit through a hole in the chassis. The strip has a plastic post that goes through that grommet. There are also 2 different heights, although the lower height is only in 11 positions. You have to use silver-bearing solder on these strips to prevent leaching of the silver that is used to line the slots. I also have some of that. I acquired these from Boeing surplus many years ago when I entertained the idea of designing my own oscilloscope. I have a bunch of other parts that I intended to use in this 60MHz scope, including the special vertical amplifier output tubes (yes, this was back in tube days.) Norm Strong |
#23
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"ScottW" wrote in
news:_P%ud.21539$Ae.6650@fed1read05: I worked and depended on a 7904 for quite a few years. Quality is the last word that comes to mind when I think of that beast ![]() ScottW Less than stellar quality? Care to share your experiences? r |
#24
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Tek stayed profitable for a long time because they won a big court fight against copycat mfr's like Hickok and Jetronix and also because many HP scopes triggered poorly. I would not buy any vintage Tek box except as a collectible or to tinker with, but they were well built, that's for sure. A few bucks spent at a hamfest will get you an old plug-in or assembly you can torment high end stores with for years of pleasure. |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Rich.Andrews wrote: wrote in news:1102901426.296651.26940 @f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: Tek stayed profitable for a long time because they won a big court fight against copycat mfr's like Hickok and Jetronix and also because many HP scopes triggered poorly. I would not buy any vintage Tek box except as a collectible or to tinker with, but they were well built, that's for sure. A few bucks spent at a hamfest will get you an old plug-in or assembly you can torment high end stores with for years of pleasure. There are enough free or low cost software programs that run on laptops that will do the same function and do it better than the old gear. There are some rare exceptions of course. Maybe you are from a distant planet where laptops have DC coupled ADCs with the linearity and bandwidth required and hardware triggering for sync...here on earth they just have sound card mic inputs which are way, way short in all aspects of even the crude free-running 50's and 60's TV shop junkers like the old RCAs and Conars. There are outboard boxes that can interface to a laptop for display/storage but they are as expensive as a real oscilloscope and are very technician-hostile. A PC does not does not does not constitute a piece of test equipment. Even commercial VME/VXI and PXI solutions are good mostly for permanent ATE setups as opposed to bench work. Hobbyists, small scale entrepreneurs, service techs, and field engineering people are all much better with even obsolete test equipment than bull**** attempts to rig commodity PC hardware for metrology. r |
#27
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Rich.Andrews wrote: wrote in news:1102901426.296651.26940 @f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: Tek stayed profitable for a long time because they won a big court fight against copycat mfr's like Hickok and Jetronix and also because many HP scopes triggered poorly. I would not buy any vintage Tek box except as a collectible or to tinker with, but they were well built, that's for sure. A few bucks spent at a hamfest will get you an old plug-in or assembly you can torment high end stores with for years of pleasure. There are enough free or low cost software programs that run on laptops that will do the same function and do it better than the old gear. There are some rare exceptions of course. Maybe you are from a distant planet where laptops have DC coupled ADCs with the linearity and bandwidth required and hardware triggering for sync...here on earth they just have sound card mic inputs which are way, way short in all aspects of even the crude free-running 50's and 60's TV shop junkers like the old RCAs and Conars. There are outboard boxes that can interface to a laptop for display/storage but they are as expensive as a real oscilloscope and are very technician-hostile. A PC does not does not does not constitute a piece of test equipment. Even commercial VME/VXI and PXI solutions are good mostly for permanent ATE setups as opposed to bench work. Hobbyists, small scale entrepreneurs, service techs, and field engineering people are all much better with even obsolete test equipment than bull**** attempts to rig commodity PC hardware for metrology. r |
#28
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Rich.Andrews wrote: wrote in news:1102901426.296651.26940 @f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: Tek stayed profitable for a long time because they won a big court fight against copycat mfr's like Hickok and Jetronix and also because many HP scopes triggered poorly. I would not buy any vintage Tek box except as a collectible or to tinker with, but they were well built, that's for sure. A few bucks spent at a hamfest will get you an old plug-in or assembly you can torment high end stores with for years of pleasure. There are enough free or low cost software programs that run on laptops that will do the same function and do it better than the old gear. There are some rare exceptions of course. Maybe on some other planet laptops have scope-grade vertical amplifiers and DACs but on this one they have woefully inadequate sound card mic inputs. In no way is a laptop or any PC a piece of test equipment per se. It's a huge disservice to everyone concerned to let the software pushers convey that erroneous notion. Outboard or PCI card hardware does exist but for servicing, education, or experimentation they suck. |
#29
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote in news:1103067895.846572.88720
@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: Rich.Andrews wrote: wrote in news:1102901426.296651.26940 @f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: Tek stayed profitable for a long time because they won a big court fight against copycat mfr's like Hickok and Jetronix and also because many HP scopes triggered poorly. I would not buy any vintage Tek box except as a collectible or to tinker with, but they were well built, that's for sure. A few bucks spent at a hamfest will get you an old plug-in or assembly you can torment high end stores with for years of pleasure. There are enough free or low cost software programs that run on laptops that will do the same function and do it better than the old gear. There are some rare exceptions of course. Maybe on some other planet laptops have scope-grade vertical amplifiers and DACs but on this one they have woefully inadequate sound card mic inputs. In no way is a laptop or any PC a piece of test equipment per se. It's a huge disservice to everyone concerned to let the software pushers convey that erroneous notion. Outboard or PCI card hardware does exist but for servicing, education, or experimentation they suck. While a PC won't make a good scope, it certainly does a superb job as a distortion analyzer, sig gen, and SNR meter. I have found that a good scope along with some software and a good sound card, I can measure the specs of nearly any amp or preamp made and do it with greater accuracy. Performing tuner alignments is a breeze with the PC and with a distortion analyzer it is a royal pain. I am glad I was able to get as much money as I did out of my old test gear. Once people find out how fast and accurate the PC is with the right software, they will dump the old dedicated analyzers like I did. r -- Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes. |
#30
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"R" wrote in message
. 1 While a PC won't make a good scope, it certainly does a superb job as a distortion analyzer, sig gen, and SNR meter. For most audio purposes, a PC with a 24/96 or 24/192 sound card is a "good enough": scope. IME a 22 KHz scope (44 KHz sampling) is a bit lame, but a 100 KHz scope (200 KHz sampling) can get a lot of jobs done. I have found that a good scope along with some software and a good sound card, I can measure the specs of nearly any amp or preamp made and do it with greater accuracy. You can even do a complete tech test of an amp or preamp nearly hands-off with the freebie Audio Rightmark software. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
McIntosh AMP... real deal ??? | Car Audio | |||
McIntosh Speakers | High End Audio | |||
McIntosh AMP... real deal ??? | Car Audio | |||
Anyone heard the Mcintosh MX-110 tuner/preamp in person? | Audio Opinions | |||
Mcintosh MR65B nameplate needed | Tech |