I have not heard the McIntosh unit but I am well familiar with Marantz. While the Marantz does not lack in detail to my ear, I would hesitate to call it analytical. Here is a quote form Paul Seydor in his review of the Ruby:
"Once asked what sonic qualities his perfect component would have, Ishiwata replied, “It would have a rich and warm midband for voices and an amazing three-dimensional soundstage.” I’d say he’s realized that goal. There is some of the warmth, richness, and dimensionality traditionally associated with tubes together with the precision, definition, transient attack, bottom-end extension, and impact for which solid-state is prized. If not echt neutral, it’s surely a sound that anyone who loves music would enjoy: natural, smooth, refined, and, well, that word again, beautiful. This beauty extends downward throughout the whole bottom end, which is solid, weighty, and grounded yet also capable of quite excellent definition, clarity, and real muscle when needed. By contrast the top end is easy on the ears: “crisp” and “extended” might not be the first words that spring to mind upon initial listen, but neither would “soft,” “muted,” “dark,” or “sloping.” On the contrary, there’s high resolution and detail on offer here, yet without its being highlighted, etched, or edgy, and the ambience and atmosphere of venues are reproduced very capably. Despite its nice sense of body, it’s also rhythmically agile so that those who place high priorities on timing and the speed with which their toes get to tapping will find next to nothing to complain about, while the vitality with which these components reproduce music from all sources guarantees high engagement and involvement."
I completely agree.
