Vantage with McIntosh or Rouge

[Niels]

Hi,

I am currently considering buying a set of Vantage and running them with a McIntosh MC275. I am a little hesitant regarding the limited power combined with the low impedance especially in the treble. I would hate it to sound harsh or forced in any way. I am alternatively considering a pair of Rogue M150. Does anyone have any experience on either? How would the one combination sound in relation to the other?

I do not have a need to play at very loud levels, but I would like the sound to always be as if there is control as well as transparency and that special electrostatic relaxed feel. I am also considering to feed the McIntosh directly with a CD player which will only decrease the obtainable sound pressure. I hope there are no other drawbacks. But most importantly, have anyone heard one of these combinations?

Thank you in advance,

Niels

 

[Pcar928fan]

Hi,

I am currently considering buying a set of Vantage and running them with a McIntosh MC275. I am a little hesitant regarding the limited power combined with the low impedance especially in the treble. I would hate it to sound harsh or forced in any way. I am alternatively considering a pair of Rouge M150. Does anyone have any experience on either? How would the one combination sound in relation to the other?

Niels,

I think a MC275 would MORE THAN enough to power those speakers quite nicely! I don't have any personal experience with that combo though so maybe others will chime in for you.

 

[yogibear]

I heard the Vantage/275 combo at a dealer showroom. I compared the 275 with a solid state McIntosh amp. The treble was too rolled off when driven by the 275. I don't think the 275 does well with the low impedence of the Vantages in the the high treble range. The solid state McIntosh (I don't remember the model number) did fine. The treble range returned to a natural level. Having owned several tubes amps in the past, I am definitely not against tube designs. I just don't think the Vantage and the 275 are a good match.

 

[Pcar928fan]

I heard the Vantage/275 combo at a dealer showroom. I compared the 275 with a solid state McIntosh amp. The treble was too rolled off when driven by the 275. I don't think the 275 does well with the low impedence of the Vantages in the the high treble range. The solid state McIntosh (I don't remember the model number) did fine. The treble range returned to a natural level. Having owned several tubes amps in the past I am definitely not against tube designs. I just don't think the Vantage and the 275 are a good match.

GOOD INFO! I did not know that! The only tube amp I own is a Marshall JCM600 for my guitar! It ROCKS!!! :rocker:

 

[Niels]

Very interesting, thank you for the good input. Does anyone have the impedance vs. frequency curve for Vantage, I can not seem to find it anywhere? And how about that Rogue Audio M150, anyone that have heard those with Vantage or have any comments?

 

[Shoe]

Mac 275

I am new to this form but not new to ML spekers. I want to weigh in on the Mc 275 amp. At the start this an amazing amp for the Vantage. I recently bought one which replaced my CJ 2500, and I must say that I was not prepared how much better the Vantage sounds. The Mac 275 I think brings out the full capablities that the Vantage is able to deliver. The Mac does what solid state offers in spades and much more. In short the Mac presents the music in a more realistic fashion. Where the musicians are place on stage performing in there space with greater articulation without bleeding or running oover each other. This effect has made the listening experience all the more involving. The sound stage is presented in such away that your side and front walls all but dissapear. I am not that good in trying to verbalize what Iam hearing, but after owning Arius i. SL3's and now the Vantage. I have never enjoy music then I do now with this combination ie Mac 275/ Vantage.
My room is 13 by 30 a dedicated room that is acousticaly tune, I have the Vantage set up on the short wall at one end of the room. The Vantage is four feet from the front wall and 2 feet from the side wall. I sit 8 feet from the center plane of the speakers. The Mac provides plenty of volume without any strian. I will post pictures of the room in the near future. I believe after having several solid state and tube amps over the years; the Mac 275 and Vantage is match made in heaven. At $3800 it is a bargin to behold.

 

[nsgarch]

Niels, Shoe said it all. I run my CLS's with a single MC275 Mk IV and it's astounding! The MC275 will definitely take another quantum leap in sonics, if you change out the little tubes. (The McChinas suck!) I've done some extensive A-B ing recently and can give you the full poop. PM me and give me your email. Also I can put you in touch with another MC275/Vantage owner if you like. I'm in the process of getting him fixed up with some better tubes (NOS RCA blackplates and NOS Telefunkens! Da bomb!)

 

[Niels]

I am very concerned about the treble in general. It is important that it is not too edgy. On the other hand it is important that is present! I heard an Octave amplifier with the Vantages and was surprised at the absent treble. There seems to be 2 opinions on the MacIntosh MC275/Vantage Combo. One is that is suffers from a similar problem as described with the Octave and one is that it is a great match. I would love to be able to do a little measuring or at least hear the combination. Thanks for the comments so far.

 

[Shoe]

I can only witness what I am hearing from the Vavtage/Mac 275 combo. To my ears the treble is not edgy nor rolled off. If anything the treble has more sparkle than some of the pass Solid states I have used in my system. What really impress me about the Mac is the over all balance of music being played. The high notes down to the low notes sound very natural and true to life without any trace of listener fatigue. Maybe my damp room plays a role in in what I am hearing.
It would be ideal if you could audition the Mac 275 in your own room. I will say I am thrill with this combination. Good luck in whatever choice you make. Sam

 

[Joey_V]

I've had all 3 Rogue preamplifiers (the current set; Metis, Perseus, 99).... and the one thing I noticed that was common in all 3 was some sort of noise in the background.

Just something for you to look for. Not sure if this applies to the amp/integrateds, but just wanted to give you a heads up. It was evident in all their preamps...

Good luck!

 

[jhorowitz128]

I've had all 3 Rogue preamplifiers (the current set; Metis, Perseus, 99).... and the one thing I noticed that was common in all 3 was some sort of noise in the background.

Just something for you to look for. Not sure if this applies to the amp/integrateds, but just wanted to give you a heads up. It was evident in all their preamps...

Good luck!

Am not familiar with the Mac nor Rogue's preamps, but the Monoblock M-150's that I've been using with my Aeruis i's for the past 3 years are dead silent.

 

[Joey_V]

Am not familiar with the Mac nor Rogue's preamps, but the Monoblock M-150's that I've been using with my Aeruis i's for the past 3 years are dead silent.

That could be....

In any case, I just read on TAS or Stereophile, I forgot which, just yesterday.... one of them had a review on the Rogue 90 amp and they also mentioned a slightly elevated noise floor.

 

[jhorowitz128]

That could be....

In any case, I just read on TAS or Stereophile, I forgot which, just yesterday.... one of them had a review on the Rogue 90 amp and they also mentioned a slightly elevated noise floor.

Am not familiar with the Rogue 90, but the Monoblock M-150's that I've been using with my Aeruis i's for the past 3 years are dead silent.

For a review, see:
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/rogue2/m150.html

 

[nsgarch]

Am not familiar with the Rogue 90, but the Monoblock M-150's that I've been using with my Aeruis i's for the past 3 years are dead silent.

Ditto my MC275 MkIV. Actually, it's quieter than my Levinson SS

 

[jhorowitz128]

Ditto my MC275 MkIV. Actually, it's quieter than my Levinson SS

Ok, now that we contend that both our amps are quiet, back to Neils' original post.

Checked out the specs on the MAC and see that it puts out 75 watts per stereo channel and 150 watts in mono. The Rogues put out 150 watts in Ultralinear mode and ~100 watts in Triode (according to Mark 2 Rogue). Since the differnce between 75 watts and 100 watts is insignificant, Neils should have no trouble with either amp driving the Vantages, which are more sensitive than my Aerius i's. If my Rogues can handle the low impedence of the Aerius, either amp should be able to handle the impedence of the Vantages. In other words, the power output of either amp will not be a problem.

As far as the sound feeling harsh or forced....well, that would depend on other factors (preamp, room acoustics, perhaps even cables). The nice thing about both amps is that a certain amount of "tone control" can be effected by tube rolling...I know it can in the Rogues.

One thing to take into account is that the standard MAC275 (not the Commemorative Edition) was last produced in 1973. The only reason I mention this is if the unit needs repair and the availability of parts. Also, I'm not familiar with MAC's customer service, but I do know that Rogue's is world-class. That could be a deal-breaker.

In any event, I'm sure the MAC is a fine piece of equipment as I know the Rogue is also. Maybe Neils need to flip a coin

 

[MiTT]

Got to agree with what jhorowitz128 says about Rogue. Should have posted to this thread some time ago, but just now finding the time. I used to have a pair of Rogue M-120's driving my ReQuests and it was a match made in Heaven. Mark O'Brien (Principal at Rogue) actually voiced the M-120's with ReQuests when he was designing the amps and I know he's a Martin Logan fan. Their customer service is absolutely top notch and a call to the company may be answered by Mark himself. Great folks to do business with.

Only reason I parted with the amps was that we were moving into our new house and I was going to be putting the system into the much smaller space it currently occupies. Big tube monoblocks generate a LOT of heat and I didn't want to deal with that in these close quarters. Plus, I was able to get a great deal on my big BAT VK-6200. When my basement dedicated room is complete I'll be looking to get some tube amps again, probably from BAT because of the synergy with my pre-amp, but I wouldn't hesitate to get the Rogue M-150's if the price was right. Neils shouldn't hesitate to give these great amps a try. FWIW, my M-120's were quiet as a tomb also...

 

[nsgarch]

Not so, not so

One thing to take into account is that the standard MAC275 (not the Commemorative Edition) was last produced in 1973. The only reason I mention this is if the unit needs repair and the availability of parts. Also, I'm not familiar with MAC's customer service, but I do know that Rogue's is world-class. That could be a deal-breaker.

I guess you're not up on Mac. The current version of the MC275 is the MkV -- less than a year old! and it has real binding posts and both SE and balanced inputs. It has a larger 470V xfmr., and puts out 95 -100 W/ch depending on the output tubes you choose. The previous model (beginning ~2004 I believe), the Mk IV is identical except it has the old style Mac barrier strip speaker terminal, and regular lead solder instead of lead-free. These amps run extremely cool and utilize the Mac patented Unity Gain Circuit which draws power from the cathode AND the plate, not just the plate. This makes them unique among tube amps in their indifference to load variations found with electrostats. They both have added features as well: tube chimneys which aid convection, ceramic/gold tube sockets, polished stainless steel chassis, single circuit board which results in lowest noise floor and modern removable power cord. Both models can be run as monos with the flip of a switch, but just one with my CLS's is absolute MAGIC! And, at a msrp of $3900, probably the biggest bargain in audio today . . . . . . .

 

[jhorowitz128]

I guess you're not up on Mac. The current version of the MC275 is the MkV -- less than a year old! and it has real binding posts and both SE and balanced inputs. It has a larger 470V xfmr., and puts out 95 -100 W/ch depending on the output tubes you choose. The previous model (beginning ~2004 I believe), the Mk IV is identical except it has the old style Mac barrier strip speaker terminal, and regular lead solder instead of lead-free. These amps run extremely cool and utilize the Mac patented Unity Gain Circuit which draws power from the cathode AND the plate, not just the plate. This makes them unique among tube amps in their indifference to load variations found with electrostats. They both have added features as well: tube chimneys which aid convection, ceramic/gold tube sockets, polished stainless steel chassis, single circuit board which results in lowest noise floor and modern removable power cord. Both models can be run as monos with the flip of a switch, but just one with my CLS's is absolute MAGIC! And, at a msrp of $3900, probably the biggest bargain in audio today . . . . . . .

nsgarch,

My bad. Went to the wrong site when I googled "MAC MC275." On further investigation of the current MacIntosh site itself, the amp is designated as a Series IV, and even then, it's only a small blurb in the brochure. Looks like a nice amp, tho.

Anyway, you're correct....I'm not up on the MACs.

 

[Niels]

I am glad I started this thread, I’ve gotten very interesting information indeed, thanks. A few comments:

Good point about the Rogue preamps. I’ll keep it in mind.

I’ve read elsewhere that the service from McIntosh should be excellent as with Rogue, unfortunately this is not my experience so far. I contacted them through their own website a while ago to get updated on what the differences between the MC275 mk IV and V is since this is not stated on their own website. I have received no answer – somewhat disappointing. Also strange that the information is not present on their site. One can’t help but wonder whether they keep the effort to a minimum an just rely on existing products to pay their bills and just update them a little once in a while. The main thing, however, is what it sounds like. Fortunately I have an oppertunity to listen to the Vantage/Mac combination this comming Friday – very exciting.

The Rogues may alternatively be interesting. Here in Denmark a pair of those and the Mac are priced about the same. For the Rogues I will definately need a preamplifier as well though, unless I get a CD with a variable output and haven’t had much luck finding anything I would like in that department yet.

Looking forward to Friday...

 

[nsgarch]

Mac 275 Mk V

The Rogues may alternatively be interesting. Here in Denmark a pair of those and the Mac are priced about the same. For the Rogues I will definately need a preamplifier as well though, unless I get a CD with a variable output and haven’t had much luck finding anything I would like in that department yet.

You'll need a preamp w/ the Mac 275 Mk V as well since it no longer has input level controls (in order to make room for REAL binding posts -- a big improvement!) Many CDP's and DAC's have remote volume control. Some are better (sonically) than others. Levinson and Wadia are the best IMO.

I'll say (again) no other tube amp I've heard with a difficult electrostatic load (as in CLS's!) performs with the effortlesness of the MC275. Must be that output transformer!