or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › McIntosh MX-121 - any thoughts?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

McIntosh MX-121 - any thoughts? - Page 20

post #571 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleishher View Post



Did anyone reply with an answer to this question?

It does not pass it. You'll need an oppo or so,etching with dual hdmi outs...
post #572 of 614
The MX-121 supports only HDMI v1.4. (See page 50 of the owners manual.) 4K was added in v1.4a. (See http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/ )
post #573 of 614
I am sorry to hear that. I don't want to use my Oppo for HDMI switching, I prefer my preamp/processor to do all of the switching. I wonder if McIntosh has any plans to update or or upgrade this model. I bought it so long ago and haven't even used it yet. It's still sitting in the box waiting for my house to be finished, which is now looking like it's going to be in March. I should probably try and sell it on Audiogon and just wait for the new models to come out. I see Marantz and Denon and a bunch of others have 4K pass thru. I wish McIntosh and the others on the hi-end would follow suit!
post #574 of 614
You might try contacting McIntosh directly about updates, however I suspect they can't be particularly helpful. Selling the unit sooner rather than later is probably going to be your best option. Purchasing home entertainment equipment usually should be postponed until you're actually ready to use it. Warranties generally have a limited lifetime, requirements change, and new features become available every year. Unlike fine wine, the resale value of audio equipment doesn't improve with age. frown.gif

My understanding is that HDMI licensing is very expensive, which adds significantly to the per-unit cost of manufacturing when relatively few units are made, as is the case for most high-end manufacturers. frown.gif

Also HDMI is still evolving. Manufacturers who can afford to produce new models every year can manage to keep up, but those with a more extended product design cycle have difficulty.
post #575 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleishher View Post

I am sorry to hear that. I don't want to use my Oppo for HDMI switching, I prefer my preamp/processor to do all of the switching. I wonder if McIntosh has any plans to update or or upgrade this model. I bought it so long ago and haven't even used it yet. It's still sitting in the box waiting for my house to be finished, which is now looking like it's going to be in March. I should probably try and sell it on Audiogon and just wait for the new models to come out. I see Marantz and Denon and a bunch of others have 4K pass thru. I wish McIntosh and the others on the hi-end would follow suit!

Your oppo wouldn't switch, it just can send video directly to the display while also sending audio to the processor.
post #576 of 614
Yes, I understand, Mookie. What would you do in my situation... Sell the MX121? Get a Denon or Marantz or Sony processor with 4K pass thru and upscaling? Or would you keep the MX121 and just use the Oppo to process the video. Keep in mind I am rarely watching a blu ray disc. I am mainly streaming digital movies and content and using my direct TV cable box as well.
post #577 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleishher View Post

Yes, I understand, Mookie. What would you do in my situation... Sell the MX121? Get a Denon or Marantz or Sony processor with 4K pass thru and upscaling? Or would you keep the MX121 and just use the Oppo to process the video. Keep in mind I am rarely watching a blu ray disc. I am mainly streaming digital movies and content and using my direct TV cable box as well.

I have a 4k projector and sold mine and got a marantz 8801. Looking back, I didn't really need to. I haven't watched anything 4k yet, and if I did I could have just automated the remote to use the other input on the display. I'm just giving you another option. The Mac is a beautiful piece, so if it's out in the open I'd consider keeping it.
post #578 of 614
Unless you actually are going to be viewing 4K video source material, there's no need for a 4K-capable pre/pro or receiver. Streamed video and cable boxes can not provide 4k video source material. They simply don't have the bandwidth. At the moment, 4K material has to be downloaded in advance of viewing because of the extremely large file sizes and the high bandwidth requirements when you actually view it. (That's how the Sony and RED 4K servers work.)

( Edited to add : 4K video source material is not yet available on Blu-ray discs. They're all 2K. Sony's "mastered in 4K" Blu-ray discs are actually 2K, down-converted from 4K masters. )

If you have a 4K TV or projector, it includes its own upscaler and that functionality isn't needed in the player or pre/pro. That said, some people have reported that the upscaling in the entry-level 4K TVs isn't all that great, but if you're the kind of person who buys McIntosh equipment, you probably wouldn't be buying an entry-level 4K TV.
Edited by Selden Ball - 11/28/13 at 9:42am
post #579 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

Unless you actually are going to be viewing 4K video source material, there's no need for a 4K-capable pre/pro or receiver. Streamed video and cable boxes can not provide 4k video source material. They simply don't have the bandwidth. At the moment, 4K material has to be downloaded in advance of viewing because of the extremely large file sizes and the high bandwidth requirements when you actually view it. (That's how the Sony and RED 4K servers work.)

( Edited to add : 4K video source material is not yet available on Blu-ray discs. They're all 2K. Sony's "mastered in 4K" Blu-ray discs are actually 2K, down-converted from 4K masters. )

If you have a 4K TV or projector, it includes its own upscaler and that functionality isn't needed in the player or pre/pro. That said, some people have reported that the upscaling in the entry-level 4K TVs isn't all that great, but if you're the kind of person who buys McIntosh equipment, you probably wouldn't be buying an entry-level 4K TV.

So the TV has it's own processor that upconverts video for optimal viewing on the TV, but would a receiver with 4K upscaling process the cable signal any better and/or upscale it to look most optimal on a 4K Ultra HDTV?
post #580 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleishher View Post

So the TV has it's own processor that upconverts video for optimal viewing on the TV, but would a receiver with 4K upscaling process the cable signal any better and/or upscale it to look most optimal on a 4K Ultra HDTV?

Not in my experience. The display does a better job.
post #581 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by gino19 View Post

I just slid the new Marantz sr6006 in where the Mac MX-132 has been for many years and it definitely has a thinner sound, much like elambo was describing the 121. The $800 Marantz still sounds pretty darn good but far from what I am used to...my dog can even tell the difference. I was hoping to avoid the high dollar pre/pro that is obsolete within a year, but looks like I must go with the 121. I like the video from directv running through the Marantz, not really using the network stuff though.

Dogs can hear better that humans so I am sure this is true. I must wonder how the dog conveyed the difference to you?
post #582 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by kucharsk View Post

Does anyone know if 4K support is something that might be able to be added in software, or would it basically require the introduction of a new model?

Yes, it's a future technology, but given 4K projectors/displays and sources already exist, along with devices like the Oppo 103 and 105 that upsample to 4K, it's no longer a moot point.

I have the same question. While I recently bought a 65 inch Panasonic 65VT60 and doubt I will be getting a 4K TV in the next few years, I want to buy the MX121 and M2807. 

 

However, I don't want to have buy a new $6000 processor in 3 years. 

post #583 of 614
At the minimum I have heard that an HDMI 2.0 upgrade is necessary to support the bandwidth of UHDTV.
HDMI wars continue. Maybe they will create a new handshake process to dump the industry on its head again........

On a positive note, one of the Mac dealers I know just swapped their Krell Foundation for a MX121. The Mcintosh yielded an immediate improvement in sound quality. They like the 121 very much.
post #584 of 614
I have the confirmation from mcintosh that unlike mx-151, mx-121 does not digitize its analog inputs in direct and pure direct modes. That is no crossover, no delay, 2 front speakers only. Therefor it has a pure analog path. Mx151 digitizes all inputs including 7.1input.

Also only common shared part with marantz 7005 is one board for hdmi swirching, audysey and airplay. Everything else is % 100 mcintosh and different than marantz.
post #585 of 614
I gave up on audyssey. It doesnt work right with my electrostaric speakers. Mx121 sounds very good without it.
post #586 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by uderman View Post

I have the confirmation from mcintosh that unlike mx-151, mx-121 does not digitize its analog inputs in direct and pure direct modes. That is no crossover, no delay, 2 front speakers only. Therefor it has a pure analog path. Mx151 digitizes all inputs including 7.1input.

Also only common shared part with marantz 7005 is one board for hdmi swirching, audysey and airplay. Everything else is % 100 mcintosh and different than marantz.

Thanks, both facts are good to know.

I have been listening to music played by my Oppo 105 through analog direct on my MX-121. But I can't honestly say that it sounds better than just playing it through HDMI and letting the MX-121 do the processing. Does anyone here know what DACs the MX-121 is using? They must be pretty good.
post #587 of 614
Very good info. The little bit of Marantz and Denon under the hood doesnt really bother me too much. It is certainly not as ridiculous as the $18,000 Simaudio that uses a lot of Denon parts from a $1000 dollar receiver. Im sorry but the nice case and power supply does not justify the price of admission.

I dont know If I mentioned it on this thread but a local dealer just replaced their Krell Foundation with a Mcintosh 121. They had an immediate preference for the Mcintosh.






post #588 of 614
Mcintosh did not reply to my email in detail regarding the dacs. One reply I got said they are 24/96khz cirrus logic but he didnt know what kind exactly.
I opened mine up but I couldnt get to the dacs. I would have to disassemble the boards. I could verify its only the top board which is marantz.it also has the abt2015 chip for video processing on the same board. Marantz uses mesh wiring between boards mcintosh uses a vertical board connecting each board together. Much better implemented this way. All other wires are shielded thick wires.

The middle board had dacs. One for every two channels. The same type dacs were used for analog zone outs. The space was too tight I couldnt see read what they say.
post #589 of 614
I'm waiting for my new 121 and 2807. Stepping up from a NAD T787 av receiver, I hope to hear a significant improvement.

I will be driving my new focal aria 948s with the matching center and 906s as surround for a 5.1 set up.

I can't wait!!!
post #590 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by joecmess View Post

I'm waiting for my new 121 and 2807. Stepping up from a NAD T787 av receiver, I hope to hear a significant improvement.

I will be driving my new focal aria 948s with the matching center and 906s as surround for a 5.1 set up.

I can't wait!!!

You should certainly update us on that. I heard the Arias at RMAF and they were very nice.
post #591 of 614

I absolutely will!   Did you hear the 948s?  

post #592 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by joecmess View Post

I absolutely will!   Did you hear the 948s?  

I believe it was the 926 model. I was surprised by the tweeter. It was quite good.
I will send you the vid i took via pm.
post #593 of 614

Guys:

 

What kind of interconnects are you using for the 121 to the 8207? 

 

I need to start thinking about XLRs.

 

Thanks in advance!

post #594 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by joecmess View Post

Guys:

What kind of interconnects are you using for the 121 to the 8207? 

I need to start thinking about XLRs.

Thanks in advance!

I use cheap monoprice XLR cables.
post #595 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubby497 View Post

I use cheap monoprice XLR cables.

So do I.
post #596 of 614
Thanks guys. Are you using the pro audio gold plated xlrs?
post #597 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by joecmess View Post

Thanks guys. Are you using the pro audio gold plated xlrs?

I bought seven of these:

4751 6ft Premier Series XLR Male to XLR Female 16AWG Cable (Gold Plated) [Microphone & Interconnect]

I didn't really need 6ft ones, though, 3ft or even shorter would have worked since my MX121 sits right on top of my MC8207.
post #598 of 614
Thanks. I will look at these.

Any heat issues with the processor on top of the Amp? are they in a cabinet?

My cabinet is floor vented. I'm going to have to take the back sliding doors off as the amp won't fit with cables, by about an inch and this setup with them stacked would like nice on one side and my sources on the other.
post #599 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by joecmess View Post

Thanks. I will look at these.

Any heat issues with the processor on top of the Amp? are they in a cabinet?

My cabinet is floor vented. I'm going to have to take the back sliding doors off as the amp won't fit with cables, by about an inch and this setup with them stacked would like nice on one side and my sources on the other.

Actually, the MX121 is on a shelf just above the shelf that the MC8207 is on. See the picture in my profile. The shelves are open in the front and back. No heat issues.
post #600 of 614

That is super nice.  

 

I have to measure but I don't think I have enough space to stack with the shelf in between. 

 

Thanks! 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › McIntosh MX-121 - any thoughts?