The Official Mcintosh Labs MX-151 & MX150 Owner's Thread - Page 34 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!



Forum Jump: 
 103Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #991 of 1214 Old 10-12-2015, 05:41 PM
Member
 
jonathan56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 41
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by uderman View Post
Datasat is nice but currently at hdmi 1.4 which is less than what 160 has. They do promise upgrades but I can't tell if they come fast enough. It's a design heavly rely on digital electronics to correct its sound output. McIntosh is a design with very clean analog section and has digital section to do a little touch up to make it better. Datasat is more flexible because everything happens in software.

In my experience its better to deal with mid to high frequencies with room treatment and correct bass with an equalizer because room treatment for low frequencies need super thick material which may not be possible for every room. Room perfect on McIntosh corrects bass much more than upper frequencies. From what I have read it leaves high frequencies alone completely. This ensures your revealing speakers do not get molested signal, especially since you mentioned your room is treated.
I'm not sure if you are endorsing the 160 or the dataSat for my application.
My room is treated all around under the stretch fabric with absorptive corning panels in the front sides down to 500 cycles, then diffusion panels on side walls 1/2 way back and extending to the rear walls.
Ceiling is a combination reflective/ adsorption. There are petty thick base trapping foam in the room corners, much of this is very this up to 10 " I believe.
I had the lexicon's audio outputs go into the QSC Dsp 770 for sound processing that was programmed by miked speakers connected to a computer to create an output of the QSC to a flat frequency response thought the Htz spectrum. This included the Subwoofers.
The result was a great sounding room. The on issue however was that the room has turned out to be a little dark. It's quite a long time ago I did this so I can't remember exactly what the milliseconds of decay in the room was, however I remember it was not lively enough and the decay was a bit short. I remember something like 150ms. Whatever it was, it wasn't terrible, but should have had a longer delay of decay.
I hope this is helpful for any AV processor that might be best suited for me.
As you can see, It's a hard decision for me.
Thank you very much.
Jonathan
jonathan56 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #992 of 1214 Old 10-12-2015, 05:42 PM
Member
 
jonathan56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 41
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by uderman View Post
Datasat is nice but currently at hdmi 1.4 which is less than what 160 has. They do promise upgrades but I can't tell if they come fast enough. It's a design heavly rely on digital electronics to correct its sound output. McIntosh is a design with very clean analog section and has digital section to do a little touch up to make it better. Datasat is more flexible because everything happens in software.

In my experience its better to deal with mid to high frequencies with room treatment and correct bass with an equalizer because room treatment for low frequencies need super thick material which may not be possible for every room. Room perfect on McIntosh corrects bass much more than upper frequencies. From what I have read it leaves high frequencies alone completely. This ensures your revealing speakers do not get molested signal, especially since you mentioned your room is treated.
I'm not sure if you are endorsing the 160 or the dataSat for my application.
My room is treated all around under the stretch fabric with absorptive corning panels in the front sides down to 500 cycles, then diffusion panels on side walls 1/2 way back and extending to the rear walls.
Ceiling is a combination reflective/ adsorption. There are petty thick base trapping foam in the room corners, much of this is very this up to 10 " I believe.
I had the lexicon's audio outputs go into the QSC Dsp 770 for sound processing that was programmed by miked speakers connected to a computer to create an output of the QSC to a flat frequency response thought the Htz spectrum. This included the Subwoofers.
The result was a great sounding room. The on issue however was that the room has turned out to be a little dark. It's quite a long time ago I did this so I can't remember exactly what the milliseconds of decay in the room was, however I remember it was not lively enough and the decay was a bit short. I remember something like 150ms. Whatever it was, it wasn't terrible, but should have had a longer delay of decay.
I hope this is helpful for any AV processor that might be best suited for me.
As you can see, It's a hard decision for me.
Thank you very much.
Jonathan
jonathan56 is offline  
post #993 of 1214 Old 10-12-2015, 06:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
OzHDHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Antipodes aka Oz
Posts: 2,359
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 657 Post(s)
Liked: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonathan56 View Post
I'm not sure if you are endorsing the 160 or the dataSat for my application.
My room is treated all around under the stretch fabric with absorptive corning panels in the front sides down to 500 cycles, then diffusion panels on side walls 1/2 way back and extending to the rear walls.
Ceiling is a combination reflective/ adsorption. There are petty thick base trapping foam in the room corners, much of this is very this up to 10 " I believe.
I had the lexicon's audio outputs go into the QSC Dsp 770 for sound processing that was programmed by miked speakers connected to a computer to create an output of the QSC to a flat frequency response thought the Htz spectrum. This included the Subwoofers.
The result was a great sounding room. The on issue however was that the room has turned out to be a little dark. It's quite a long time ago I did this so I can't remember exactly what the milliseconds of decay in the room was, however I remember it was not lively enough and the decay was a bit short. I remember something like 150ms. Whatever it was, it wasn't terrible, but should have had a longer delay of decay.
I hope this is helpful for any AV processor that might be best suited for me.
As you can see, It's a hard decision for me.
Thank you very much.
Jonathan
You could do something like I've done and get a quality AVP to fill the gap while you wait till more feedback on the the higher end units like the MX-160 is available. I'm still keen on finding out how the MX-160 sounds myself, but am far from unhappy with the Marantz 8802 I've got doing AVP duties right now. At the US price point of them, they're not a big outlay for your budget and not terribly hard to offload even here on the forums due to current popularity.

Funny, when you were describing the elaborate room treatment in your HT, I started to wonder whether you may have been on the edge of having too dead a room acoustically. I've recently fitted up 8 acoustic panels in 50"x25"x2.75" on to side walls, front of ceiling area and rear between speakers in my recently finished room. The room now sounds right about where I want it acoustically and measurements look quite good to boot.

Steinway P200 system still for sale Link
OzHDHT is offline  
post #994 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 04:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 1,361
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 290 Post(s)
Liked: 154
Chuck, I will assume you are still reading this thread. As you can see lots of people here are concerned relative to the HDMI limitation issue. Even if you don't want to answer questions, perhaps you could make a statement here relative to the current 160 HDMI spec as well as the processor's ability to be upgraded, or will the spec only change in a future model revision (161). This may help prevent potential customers from going elsewhere relative to a processor purchase. No statement makes our confidence to purchase less likely.

Last edited by G-Rex; 10-13-2015 at 04:44 AM.
G-Rex is online now  
post #995 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 05:10 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
thrang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 5,858
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1375 Post(s)
Liked: 1134
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
Chuck, I will assume you are still reading this thread. As you can see lots of people here are concerned relative to the HDMI limitation issue. Even if you don't want to answer questions, perhaps you could make a statement here relative to the current 160 HDMI spec as well as the processor's ability to be upgraded, or will the spec only change in a future model revision (161). This may help prevent potential customers from going elsewhere relative to a processor purchase. No statement makes our confidence to purchase less likely.
Yeah...I think Chuck is G-O-N-E...he basically wanted to take his ball and go home after three posts.

Maybe they are carefully re-verifying what the 10.2 bandwidth can and cannot do? If it cannot pass BT.2020 and/or HDR, at least at 4K 24p, they may not have an answer.
thrang is offline  
post #996 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 05:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rod#S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonathan56 View Post
I'm not sure if you are endorsing the 160 or the dataSat for my application.

Jonathan
I know your question wasn't directed at me but what I think would be really beneficial to you is head on over to the Datasat RS20i, Datasat LS10, Trinnov Altitude32 and Theta Casablanca threads and start getting some opinions there as well. It never hurts to ask the crowd that owns or has serious interest in those devices and there are installer and product reps in those threads that don't run off at the 1st hint of product critisism.

I still can't believe the McIntosh guy up and left

Rod#S is offline  
post #997 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 05:19 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
thrang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 5,858
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1375 Post(s)
Liked: 1134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod#S View Post
I know your question wasn't directed at me but what I think would be really beneficial to you is head on over to the Datasat RS20i, Datasat LS10, Trinnov Altitude32 and Theta Casablanca threads and start getting some opinions there as well. It never hurts to ask the crowd that owns or has serious interest in those devices and there are installer and product reps in those threads that don't run off at the 1st hint of product critisism.

I still can't believe the McIntosh guy up and left
adidino likes this.
thrang is offline  
post #998 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 09:02 AM
Advanced Member
 
scanido's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Toronto Suburbs
Posts: 694
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
Chuck, I will assume you are still reading this thread. As you can see lots of people here are concerned relative to the HDMI limitation issue. Even if you don't want to answer questions, perhaps you could make a statement here relative to the current 160 HDMI spec as well as the processor's ability to be upgraded, or will the spec only change in a future model revision (161). This may help prevent potential customers from going elsewhere relative to a processor purchase. No statement makes our confidence to purchase less likely.
Highly doubt Chuck, let alone McIntosh, will be making any sort of statement about this.

If history is any indication, it would be more likely that a MX161 surface with the HDMI specs that should of been designed in the first place, then for Mcintosh to offer any upgrades to the MX160. At least for the MX150 you can "upgrade" the firmware to make it an MX151, doubtful this would be the same case for the new processor.

Personally am holding off of purchasing any next gen processors from Mcintosh until the dust settles.

See Profile
scanido is offline  
post #999 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 09:17 AM
Member
 
jonathan56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 41
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod#S View Post
I know your question wasn't directed at me but what I think would be really beneficial to you is head on over to the Datasat RS20i, Datasat LS10, Trinnov Altitude32 and Theta Casablanca threads and start getting some opinions there as well. It never hurts to ask the crowd that owns or has serious interest in those devices and there are installer and product reps in those threads that don't run off at the 1st hint of product critisism.

I still can't believe the McIntosh guy up and left
I agree, amazing that guy from Mac couldn't take some legit concerns.
I'm a little surpassed people are recommending a Marantz in a high end system like mine. Am I just a audiophile snob or I under the wrong impression that companies like Marantz, pioneer, onkyo, etc are things that college kids but from best buy?
Also, it seems now even a company like DataSat shouldn't be considered since it's HDMI is even inferior to the Machintosh that has 10gbps.
Definitely would appreciate some clarification .
Jonathan
jonathan56 is offline  
post #1000 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 09:18 AM
Member
 
jonathan56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 41
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 11
surprised
jonathan56 is offline  
post #1001 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 09:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,238
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1569 Post(s)
Liked: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzHDHT View Post
Know where you are coming from in principal but personally, having just implemented 7.2.4 in my new room, the idea of adding further speakers and amplification holds very little appeal. It's starting to get beyond the practical for a lot of HT enthusiasts in all but the largest HT's to keep adding channels.
Valid point. And I currently have no plans to add more speakers.

BUT I remember not long ago, prior to Atmos/Auro, where I was adamant that I would not add heights or wides when it was the rage. Like who needed that many speakers? And before that, why would I need to go to 7.1 when 5.1 sounded great? So now I have 11 channels and 4 subs !!!

All of that to say, I still think that for a $14,000 processor, it ought to have at least the physical channels so that when the chips allow more channels, I would not have to dump the platform.

My real purpose in looking to change surround processors is for an improvement over Audyssey (Pro) and not more channels. I was fortunate to have a Datasat RS20i in my room for about 4 months and the improvement of Dirac over Audyssey was pretty substantial in all aspects - but just not $23,000 more substantial [which, I recognize, is a very "relative" thing]. Our comparisons were done blind as I am absolutely subject to "expectation bias". (As I believe is everyone else but many won't admit it ). If interested, here is the thread Blind Comparisons of SSP's

Has anyone ever done a direct compare of Audyssey vs Room Perfect over a short enough time period in the same room with the same equipment where aural memory is still in place? If so, where might I find those results posted?

Thanks.

Last edited by audioguy; 10-13-2015 at 09:43 AM.
audioguy is online now  
post #1002 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 09:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,238
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1569 Post(s)
Liked: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonathan56 View Post
I agree, amazing that guy from Mac couldn't take some legit concerns.
I'm a little surpassed people are recommending a Marantz in a high end system like mine. Am I just a audiophile snob or I under the wrong impression that companies like Marantz, pioneer, onkyo, etc are things that college kids but from best buy?
Also, it seems now even a company like DataSat shouldn't be considered since it's HDMI is even inferior to the Machintosh that has 10gbps.
Definitely would appreciate some clarification .
Jonathan
First of all, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Marantz and "high end" is a pretty relative term.

If the $ are not an issue, a great choice would be the Datasat. [Disclosure: I am a Datasat trained RS20i calibrator]. When we did our [blind] comparison of the Datasat and an Integra, 95% to 98% of the differences were related to Audyssey vs Dirac. And given much experience in this area, the results would have been the same had we used the latest and greatest Marantz. [We did a similar compare but not blind]. Not even close. Everything about Dirac vs Audyssey was improved. And while the RS20i is currently limited to a 7.x.4 Atmos configuration by the the chip utilized, it can support up to 24 physical channels so that once the chip can be upgraded, you are not restricted from adding additional channels. And it is is certainly more modular than most other products - with the exception of Theta and Trinnov. So my guess is that when an HDMI upgrade is desired, while you may or may not be required to send in the unit, at least it will be upgradable.

If Datasat is not your cup of tea, then go for the Trinnov (with an additional $10,000 of cost).

What some are suggesting, I think, is if you want to minimize risk (in case what I just said is not accurate relative to upgradability), then an 8802 is a great and relatively inexpensive placeholder.

And who knows what might be coming down the pike that provides what you are looking for at a more modest cost.
OzHDHT likes this.
audioguy is online now  
post #1003 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 10:12 AM
RUR
Innocent Bystander
 
RUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California Republic
Posts: 2,729
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 341 Post(s)
Liked: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
And who knows what might be coming down the pike that provides what you are looking for at a more modest cost.
One of the more interesting. less expensive offerings is being introduced by AudioControl: http://www.audiocontrol.com/home-aud...concert-avr-9/

We'll know more in a couple of days, but they claim HDMI 2.0a/HDCP 2.2, ATMOS and (eventually) DTS:X, and it uses Dirac Live RC. List price has been posted as $6,200, with a lesser model AVR-7 @ $4,200.
RUR is offline  
post #1004 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 10:29 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
thrang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 5,858
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1375 Post(s)
Liked: 1134
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonathan56 View Post
I agree, amazing that guy from Mac couldn't take some legit concerns.
I'm a little surpassed people are recommending a Marantz in a high end system like mine. Am I just a audiophile snob or I under the wrong impression that companies like Marantz, pioneer, onkyo, etc are things that college kids but from best buy?
Also, it seems now even a company like DataSat shouldn't be considered since it's HDMI is even inferior to the Machintosh that has 10gbps.
Definitely would appreciate some clarification .
Jonathan
Only you know if you're a snob...

Maybe just uninformed.

The Marantz 8802 is an excellent piece for its price point, and most feel it has a greater feature/performance value than higher priced units...the laws of diminishing returns.

The super high end is making increasingly little sense as the market matures and component costs keep dropping. The 151 sounded better than the 8802, but after carefully calibration and tweaking of the 8802, by how much? 10-15%? And add in some of the flexibility and features of the 8802, especially Atmos which the 151 did not have, and the total weight comparison was closer.

Now, the 160 potentially increases the gap...adding elevation speakers takes that comparative advantage away from the 8802. There's a pretty good high-end USB DAC in the 160, and that has real value at least to me. If they fixed the Aux output issues of the 151 and it provides greater flexibility for speaker assignment and multiple subs, there is another potential advantage.

But I'm not slumming it right now with the 8802, that's quite clear to me.
thrang is offline  
post #1005 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 12:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,238
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1569 Post(s)
Liked: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post
One of the more interesting. less expensive offerings is being introduced by AudioControl: http://www.audiocontrol.com/home-aud...concert-avr-9/

We'll know more in a couple of days, but they claim HDMI 2.0a/HDCP 2.2, ATMOS and (eventually) DTS:X, and it uses Dirac Live RC. List price has been posted as $6,200, with a lesser model AVR-7 @ $4,200.
Interesting. If it is the full function Dirac, could be a killer product thought I know almost zero about this company other than they have been around awhile.

(I would prefer a model with no amps if they make one).
audioguy is online now  
post #1006 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 01:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
thezaks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Laveen, AZ
Posts: 1,397
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
Interesting. If it is the full function Dirac, could be a killer product thought I know almost zero about this company other than they have been around awhile.

(I would prefer a model with no amps if they make one).
It is definitely an interesting looking option. They typically seem to align with Arcam products, so I wonder if Arcam is coming out with a similar product? Anyway, for me, the fan is a deal killer - especially here in Phoenix. I had the Arcam AVR600, and not only did the fan come on, it sounded like a plane taking off. No thanks.

Dave
thezaks is offline  
post #1007 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 01:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,238
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1569 Post(s)
Liked: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by thezaks View Post
It is definitely an interesting looking option. They typically seem to align with Arcam products, so I wonder if Arcam is coming out with a similar product? Anyway, for me, the fan is a deal killer - especially here in Phoenix. I had the Arcam AVR600, and not only did the fan come on, it sounded like a plane taking off. No thanks.

Dave
The fan is not a big deal for me as my two Peavey amps have fans, as does my music server as does my power management system. They are in a separate room.
audioguy is online now  
post #1008 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 03:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brian B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by thezaks View Post
It is definitely an interesting looking option. They typically seem to align with Arcam products, so I wonder if Arcam is coming out with a similar product? Anyway, for me, the fan is a deal killer - especially here in Phoenix. I had the Arcam AVR600, and not only did the fan come on, it sounded like a plane taking off. No thanks.

Dave
They have a receiver with Dirac. I assume they will have a processor as well. We shall see--and if it works!

B.
Brian B is offline  
post #1009 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 04:40 PM
Senior Member
 
uderman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Fitchburg,MA
Posts: 447
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 39
You should buy a pre-owned mx-150 or 151 for under $5k to get by a few months to a year. You will probably lose much less than $1k on resale when you are ready to spend big bucks on up to date products once available.

In the mean time, you can evaluate if you like Room Perfect and McIntosh sound. There is so many mx-150/151 for sale now, the value of it really rock bottom. You might even profit once the market goes back to normal.

Wanted:
Theta Voyager - Working/Not Working
Muse/Hi-Vision Discs - Mint/Complete Only!
uderman is offline  
post #1010 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 05:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
OzHDHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Antipodes aka Oz
Posts: 2,359
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 657 Post(s)
Liked: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
Valid point. And I currently have no plans to add more speakers.

BUT I remember not long ago, prior to Atmos/Auro, where I was adamant that I would not add heights or wides when it was the rage. Like who needed that many speakers? And before that, why would I need to go to 7.1 when 5.1 sounded great? So now I have 11 channels and 4 subs !!!

All of that to say, I still think that for a $14,000 processor, it ought to have at least the physical channels so that when the chips allow more channels, I would not have to dump the platform.

My real purpose in looking to change surround processors is for an improvement over Audyssey (Pro) and not more channels. I was fortunate to have a Datasat RS20i in my room for about 4 months and the improvement of Dirac over Audyssey was pretty substantial in all aspects - but just not $23,000 more substantial [which, I recognize, is a very "relative" thing]. Our comparisons were done blind as I am absolutely subject to "expectation bias". (As I believe is everyone else but many won't admit it ). If interested, here is the thread Blind Comparisons of SSP's

Has anyone ever done a direct compare of Audyssey vs Room Perfect over a short enough time period in the same room with the same equipment where aural memory is still in place? If so, where might I find those results posted?

Thanks.
I totally agree with you on that evolution of channels. I think the key early in the piece when AVP and AVR's started to feature expanded channels that weren't supported in the actual software formats, it was pretty hard to justify adding them in. Also, I know my own situation changed dramatically when I moved homes this year and suddenly was building a dedicated room with a gyprock ceiling that I could suddenly much more easily add speakers into. I also used to run 7.1 in my old place years ago, but the room was so compact it was really hard to justify having the side channels propped right next to the lounge on stands, so I devolved back to 5.1 in that system after a couple of years. Now I've got no excuse with my current rooms more ideal proportions not have sides and rears. It is kind of hard to envision where it could go from here in feasible extra channels beyond 11.2. That's not saying it won't happen. It is a lot to fork out on the next gen McIntosh, which is why I've def got a large pause before being convinced I would want to. I mean I got my second hand MX-150 for peanuts practically, $6K if memory serves me correct. So I wasn't exactly hesitant to send it on its way earlier in the year (and still waiting for my A/V supplier to on-sell it).

As far a testing Room Perfect vs Audyssey, I had that very opp, when I got my 8802. I completed the swap out as quickly as I could after listening one last time to the MX-150. I made several observations over on the on the 8802 at the time and I believe also on this thread about my experiences. I do think there's quite significant difference in the two systems. Mind you I'd like to have my current room for reference as its a far better baseline acoustically than my old one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post
One of the more interesting. less expensive offerings is being introduced by AudioControl: http://www.audiocontrol.com/home-aud...concert-avr-9/

We'll know more in a couple of days, but they claim HDMI 2.0a/HDCP 2.2, ATMOS and (eventually) DTS:X, and it uses Dirac Live RC. List price has been posted as $6,200, with a lesser model AVR-7 @ $4,200.
Hmmm, that's quite interesting. I know AudioControl from doing years of competition car audio back in the 90's. I've never seen much about their home audio gear. It's a pity after finally moving back to XLRs and that being a receiver their units can't fit them in like the older AVP they make. If it is a good unit it could be a replacement for a Pioneer LX-88 I have in another system so I'll keep an eye out for reviews and feedback on it. Looks their home stuff is a little lightly distributed when I looked for retailers, particularly online.

Steinway P200 system still for sale Link

Last edited by OzHDHT; 10-13-2015 at 05:44 PM.
OzHDHT is offline  
post #1011 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 07:26 PM
Senior Member
 
mrevo2u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 21
As a sidenote; the anthem rep is quite active in their respective threads and takes all criticism, etc like a big boy.....i personally put a lot of value on their involvment in the threads (all mfg reps for that matter) and their willingness to help solve problems and sometimes take criticism. Hopefully that criticism leads to better products and everybody wins.
mrevo2u is offline  
post #1012 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 08:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 1,361
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 290 Post(s)
Liked: 154
I think with the McIntosh name, they feel like it will sell anyways despite the criticism here. They are obviously not concerned with the "informed enthusiast" and are more concerned with their typical mainstream customer who are far less informed. Because of McIntosh's indifference here, I will look into other processors or wait for the 161 revision.

There are more rumors of the Lexicon MP20 and it's quite impressive QuantumLogic Surround rearing its head again, but this time likely under the Mark Levinson name due to the Lexicon dealer network being dismantled. On the AVS home page there is a Mark Levinson featured story and I find it interesting that the pic of the equipment rack shows a blurred out component. Hmm....

http://www.avsforum.com/mark-levinso...ajor-comeback/
G-Rex is online now  
post #1013 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 08:36 PM
RUR
Innocent Bystander
 
RUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California Republic
Posts: 2,729
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 341 Post(s)
Liked: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
On the AVS home page there is a Mark Levinson featured story and I find it interesting that the pic of the equipment rack shows a blurred out component. Hmm....

http://www.avsforum.com/mark-levinso...ajor-comeback/
Patience!
RUR is offline  
post #1014 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 08:41 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 181
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Hi guys,
i have been folowing this thread and today i have sold my classe ssp 800 and soon my classe mono blocks will also leave my house. With that said, i would like to know what amplifier i should choose to handle my 800d. i am torn between the mc601 & the mc452. i read in some places that the mc452 is the same sound quality and that the improvement from the mc601s is marginal. The price gap is ALOT, but how much would i be losing by going with a mc452? i will not lie, i owned the mc205 and it was the worst multichannel amp i have ever heard. i don't think that should be an amp to be used for any front speakers. It should be strictly for the center and 4 rears.
Anyhow, has anyone here compared the mc452 vs the mc601 with demanding speakers such as the b&w 800s? i don't want to make the wrong selection here. Lastly, there is always the option of a pair of mc301s, but i have never read anything about them so i am afraid they won't be anywhere close to the already known good sound of the mc452 & mc601s.
i look forward to your responses.
Amp_guy532 is offline  
post #1015 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 08:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
OzHDHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Antipodes aka Oz
Posts: 2,359
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 657 Post(s)
Liked: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
I think with the McIntosh name, they feel like it will sell anyways despite the criticism here. They are obviously not concerned with the "informed enthusiast" and are more concerned with their typical mainstream customer who are far less informed. Because of McIntosh's indifference here, I will look into other processors or wait for the 161 revision.

There are more rumors of the Lexicon MP20 and it's quite impressive QuantumLogic Surround rearing its head again, but this time likely under the Mark Levinson name due to the Lexicon dealer network being dismantled. On the AVS home page there is a Mark Levinson featured story and I find it interesting that the pic of the equipment rack shows a blurred out component. Hmm....

http://www.avsforum.com/mark-levinso...ajor-comeback/

I was wondering what other components would emerge new from ML, so if it's a next gen Lexicon then I'm definitely interested in seeing what its got. With the development abilities of Harmon, I'd have to think it should be pretty impressive.

Edit: I've got my supplier contact at CEDIA this week, so I've just emailed him for the inside info from ML while he's there. He's pretty well connected so he should be able to get more concrete info on their new SSP.

Steinway P200 system still for sale Link

Last edited by OzHDHT; 10-13-2015 at 11:01 PM.
OzHDHT is offline  
post #1016 of 1214 Old 10-13-2015, 09:59 PM
Senior Member
 
mrevo2u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Would be great if they put something out as revolutionary as the mc-12 was......
mrevo2u is offline  
post #1017 of 1214 Old 10-14-2015, 04:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rod#S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
I think with the McIntosh name, they feel like it will sell anyways despite the criticism here. They are obviously not concerned with the "informed enthusiast" and are more concerned with their typical mainstream customer who are far less informed. Because of McIntosh's indifference here, I will look into other processors or wait for the 161 revision.

There are more rumors of the Lexicon MP20 and it's quite impressive QuantumLogic Surround rearing its head again, but this time likely under the Mark Levinson name due to the Lexicon dealer network being dismantled. On the AVS home page there is a Mark Levinson featured story and I find it interesting that the pic of the equipment rack shows a blurred out component. Hmm....

http://www.avsforum.com/mark-levinso...ajor-comeback/

I would love to see the MP20 come back to light, obviously it would have to be much re-tweaked due to the change in the audio landscape i.e. ATMOS, Auro, dts:X but unfortunately being under the Levinson umbrella will make it unjustifiably more expensive then if released as a Lexicon/JBL


Last edited by Rod#S; 10-14-2015 at 04:16 AM.
Rod#S is offline  
post #1018 of 1214 Old 10-14-2015, 04:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rod#S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amp_guy532 View Post
Hi guys,
i have been folowing this thread and today i have sold my classe ssp 800 and soon my classe mono blocks will also leave my house. With that said, i would like to know what amplifier i should choose to handle my 800d. i am torn between the mc601 & the mc452. i read in some places that the mc452 is the same sound quality and that the improvement from the mc601s is marginal. The price gap is ALOT, but how much would i be losing by going with a mc452? i will not lie, i owned the mc205 and it was the worst multichannel amp i have ever heard. i don't think that should be an amp to be used for any front speakers. It should be strictly for the center and 4 rears.
Anyhow, has anyone here compared the mc452 vs the mc601 with demanding speakers such as the b&w 800s? i don't want to make the wrong selection here. Lastly, there is always the option of a pair of mc301s, but i have never read anything about them so i am afraid they won't be anywhere close to the already known good sound of the mc452 & mc601s.
i look forward to your responses.

Just curious, why do you think McIntosh amps are going to be better than the Classe? I would say this would be a sideways step. Are you really in love with their aesthetics? That I could understand but you have to take quite a financial loss just for that.

Rod#S is offline  
post #1019 of 1214 Old 10-14-2015, 04:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,238
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1569 Post(s)
Liked: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod#S View Post
but unfortunately being under the Levinson umbrella will make it unjustifiably more expensive then if released as a Lexicon/JBL
Based upon some of the wording used in the ML announcement link ["premium", "luxury" and this statement: "Dinesh noted that people who can afford such systems often don’t have the time or desire to figure out how to operate basic functions beyond turning the system on or off"], my guess would be $35,000 to $40,000. The never delivered Lexicon piece was estimated to be $15,000 to $20,000 if I recall and by the time you add Auro, Atmos, DTS-X and the ML name, "whoa Nelly"!!!

I got to hear the Lexicon piece at CEDIA a few years ago and it was by far the very best audio I have ever heard (done in a trailer no less).

And just like their are McIntosh fans who will buy the 160/161 regardless of the shortcomings "because it is a Mac", so will there be [incredilby rich] fans who will buy the ML piece "because it is ML".

Last edited by audioguy; 10-14-2015 at 04:58 AM.
audioguy is online now  
post #1020 of 1214 Old 10-14-2015, 06:12 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 181
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Liked: 59
i supposed NOBODY has done a/b comparisons here between the mc452 and the mc601s.... i have been trying to read all over and nothing that really makes me be 100 percent sure of what to get. I spoke to mcintosh and they claimed that my b&w 800s love juice and they would be far better with the mc601. however, who knows if this is just to boost their mc601 sales...
Amp_guy532 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off