McIntosh C2200 w/ solid state amp?

I have owned my Mc C2200 for a number of years. My McCormack DNA-125 was starting to die.  I always thought the Mc and the Mc was a really good integration and really made some nice noises. But my amp was dying. WELL... I took a chance.  I bought a SCHIITT TYR amp.  This is the first time I ever bought a piece of audio gear without auditioning it first.  Schitt has a 15 day return policy so I decided to take a chance and if I didn't like it I would just send it back... that approach worked for me.  WELL... the SCHITT TYR and the C2200 is considerably better than the Mc and the Mc I was so impressed with.  The bass is tight and strong, the mid-range details are very deep, the soundstage is extremely broad and the highs just shimmer.  I am keeping the TYR.  The C2200 with a solid state amp just works and with the TYR... marvelous. Oh... the background quietness of the TYR and the C2200 is also notable... the quiet just makes everything else sound so good.

Jan, I have similar set up. I have the Mc402 and 1037 BE. I am getting great results with the c2200 pre amp. I like this combo very much. If you go this route you may want to roll the tubes. I use Mullards tubes that i got from Upscale Audio in Upland.

Odd. I had a C2200 with a C402 in the house and couldn't figure out why it was so totally flat and dull with my Martin Logan Summits until I substituted the C2300. Now it works.

I've got the C2200 and used it first with Bel Canto Evo200.2s., two of them. Absolutely gorgeous. I am now running into powered Linn Artikulats--same result. I've also heard this preamp drive the MC402, a Mac solid state amp, lots of times. I sell the stuff and it was how we demonstated the C2200. Again, sublime. I'm probably going to put my C2200 up for auction, however, as I'm intrigued by the C2300's upgraded phono section. It's not clear that the C2300 is any better for the line stage. The guy at McIntosh said he's pretty sure he heard that the line stage measures better but he'd not heard it himself to say it was any better than the C2200. The McIntosh specs that I've seen don't seem any different.

I own both the C2200 and the C46, also have the Mac 252 ss amp, both sound mighty nice into the 252, also have alinn ss amp and again both sound nice...I really like them both and glad I have both...they do sound different but both share the Mac sound...if someone put a gun to my head and said pick one...I would say...shoot

Sorry about garbelked post.To much cabernet or lack of sleep.I sold Mac for 6 years getting out just as they were introducing the glass products.While the $12K amp they started with may have been to pricey the new products based on the 275/KT88 's are great amps.If you can choose your speaker in the shop and have them demo both tube and solid state.But like I said if you want to economise and balanced amp within past 10 years will give you same house sound new piece woould.Guess my last garbled line was how nice a pair of the new Quads would sound with this set up and very FAST pitch accurate sub(though you could go with much less power.One thing that's great aboput the 2200 is that you can pre -program volume settings for each source component).The one thing that I found was that if not the last word in resolutioon the Mac line was and is highly musical and sounds great with a very broad line of speakers from a Thiel to a Quadl,B&W etc.Some amps like Krell might match up great with some speakers but certainly not a Thiel.But like Levenson the Mac seem to be forgiving and can do justice to all but the most laid back speakers.Like I said I'd vote the new Quads and VERY good sub and that would satisfy me for as long as the gear lasted which should be 30 or 40 years.Only advances in digital we can't forsee which is years off ( even though some products like the DEQX are allready producing amazing systems in speaker component integration and room correction) this gear you mention will allow you to be pleased for quite some time.Hell some folks still swear by Thorens 124 II tables,Quad ESL 57's and vintage Mac or Marantz tube gear and are pleased as puch feeding sources into systems that were current in 1960.They don't want to change a thing because their systems sound great.The future MAYBE digital but I don't think you'd be as quick to give up your rig as many others with the "latest and greatest" gear.Go for it!!!!!!!
Best
Chazzbo

Hallo I am Jan (46)
I have buy a new Focal Utopia Diva and MC 402
and need preamp - having a big question!!
take C46 or C2200

Thank you about your opinience !

and.. CD?.
Teac DV 50?
CD Mac MPV 861?
MCD 205,?
MCA 201 (new one)
or Accupgase DP67?
Thank you about your opinience !
Jan

I use the Mac C2200 tube preamp with the MC402. They make beautiful music together. I strongly agree with Valleyplastic. A definite keeper! Tube sweetness along with solid-state crunch. As far as I am concerned, the best of both worlds. Go and listen and decide.

If you want to save some bucks how big is room an how efficient are speakers?Just because Mac makes MC500 or MC1000's does not need you require them.Last series that will drive most speakers in normanl rooms would be a used MC353.Avoid the MC300 as while it is close in power it's not a true balanced amp.Man even the bottom of the lines that set up with maybe there digital player and an esotericn multi player plus a pair of the new Quads with fast pitch accurate sub that's my idea of a nice rig.
Chazzbo

I have a C2200,MC 352 combo driving my Proac 1SC's

PURE MAGIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!

C2200 & the 402 DYNAMITE nice combo, one I should have kept longer. I think the 2200 is the best pre they ever made. I used this with the 352 & the 402. Tubes and SS make a good combo.
Velo62 will likely ad to this thread, maybe he will also give us a update on his 2275. He gets all the good toys, I look for his hand me downs.

i used the 2200 with the 602 and it was a great combo....float like a butterfly, sting like a bee. lots of mac owners mix tubes and ss