Anyone use McIntosh MX110z with a MC275VI?

Considering a MC275VI with my MX110z but it requires at least a 100k impedance per its manual. The MC275VI has a 47k input impedance. Not a 10:1 ratio.

When I called McIntosh their technical stated that ALL Macs are designed to work fine together. That’s their position.

Looking for any real world users out there that can comment? Many thanks

 

bump

 

bbbump…

 

Imo it sounds like a great reason to update the 60+ year old 110. As I'm sure you know the mx110's fetch top dollar and would make for a nice down payment on a more compatible preamp which the mc275 is certainly deserving of.
I have no experience with that pairing as the only amp I used my 110 with was a mc2500 during the short time it was here. I wasn't pleased with that combination and felt the 110 wasn't up to the task of driving the mc2500 properly.

 

It'll work fine. You'll get more transparency and current drive with a modern preamp though. I am working on an MX110Z now, and will try it out with an amp that has a 47k ohm input impedance.
-Bill

 

I hear you but personally like what the MX110z does, kinda looks through “rose colored glasses”. Im running through an MC2505 (first mac solid state) but am curious still if anyone uses this 60 year old tube pre/tuner with a modern MC275 VI with success?

 

So I got the MX110 fired up today after finishing updating the caps in it. Just as I recalled the last one here, it has a lot of voltage output and a punchy sound. I connected it to an amp with 47k input impedance. It gets really loud, really quick, maybe 8 or 9 o'clock on the volume control is all you get before you are there. It's going to be a better match for the Mac amp than it is for the ss amp that I tried it with today. I don't see any reason why you would not like the pairing with an MC275.
-Bill

 

You are talking about minuscule amounts of power
Amp needs 1.7 V for 100% output
47k Ohm, 36 uA or 61 uW
100 kOhm, 17 uV, 29 uW

I can't see that making a difference .
The first Gen. 275's were 100k Ohm

 

All of the vintage McIntosh tube amps had an adjustable gain pot at their input jacks for each channel so you could adjust, match, and use the amp with a wide range of preamps. Did the MC275VI not maintain this feature in its design? The original amp had it.

 

No, the latest amp does not have input level adjustment. That was a great feature for getting both channel balance and preamp to power amp gain levels optimized. Plus, the new amp looks hideous in comparison to the originals IMO. The benefit of not having the pots at the input is likely better SNR with a properly matched preamp. Most preamps will work fine with it, as @Ingenieur also relates.
-Bill

 

The MX110Z with updated caps and power supply should sound great with the MC275VI. As good as anything out there. I always loved the sound of it as a preamp, especially the phono section.

 

now i just have to get a MC275 without breaking the bank

 

I’d look for an MC275IV or V. They just look better.

 

As to the look, the only difference in V to VI is the speaker binding posts, which are a lot easier to use on the VI. Personally I don’t like the green LEDs, so I use a mono trigger cable between the MC275 and my preamp which keeps them always off.

EDIT: Actually, it was the change from IV to V that really improved the binding posts. The V and VI look pretty similar.

 

agree why didn't they go with light blue LEDs? would have been better imo

 

I don't care for any LED. You could always defeat that "effect". Personally, I'd get the older versions if you really need the power for flexibility with speaker systems or old Mac speaker systems. If you are going to use these with your Wharfedale W70 speakers, then I would get an MC240 (if you can find and afford one) or an MC225, both of which are excellent sounding amps. The trade-off is limited power available. For many systems and rooms, there is no need for added power, rather it is the quality of the first few watts that really maintain the overall sound of the system.
-Bill

 

While I don’t dig the LEDs, don’t let that turn you off to what is a very fine amplifier. You can defeat the LEDs easily enough and it looks appropriately vintage.

Honestly, I’m also not a huge fan of the blue backlit meters on my preamp, but I generally leave them because it looks odd with them dark. I almost got the C22 because it had no meters, but I needed a good DAC and home theater pass-thru, which the C2600 has (and it’s also a very good unit). In pass-thru mode the meter lights can also be defeated with a mono trigger cable, which is nice. I don’t need to see all the equipment lit up while watching a movie.

 

wonder if McIntosh have any plans for a 60th edition MC275? hmmm

 

Some prefer the MC275IV as it was built with better leaded solder. The recessed KT88s on the MC275VI chassis just look wrong to me.

 

Ah, I got you now. Yes, the KT88s are recessed on the current model. I didn’t really pick up on it until looking at them side by side though. I admit I’m not certain how much difference the solder makes. The IV, V and VI are pretty similar though. The IV was the first one built on a PCB, and I think these have been around long enough to prove their robustnesses and longevity (as well as resale value). Can’t go wrong with any of them I think.

 

Update:

I ended up getting a vintage MC240 from Audio Classics which was its period correct amp back then. Not the power of the MC275 but it’s a very nice pairing (100k input). Running vinyl mostly… the phono pre on the MX110z is superb. I put it right up there with my EAR834p phono pre…