Mcintosh MA 6900 integrated vs Mcintosh separates?

This will not be much help but, I have owned the 6900 for almost three years now. I have had Thiel CS 2.3's and now the Vonschweikert VR4jr hooked up to it. It is one musical integrated amp! I have heard other speakers hooked up to it at my dealer (B&W, Martin Logan, etc.) and this is just one special integrated that mates well with many different speakers.

The 46/402 combo and 6900 are a match soundwise, the 6900 has plenty of power for your 87db/W/m 805's the 46/402 has more power,dynamics every... The c2200 will utilize those tweeters and mids more effectively and add some needed life (to my ears which prefer a different sound to B&W) than the previous combos. I would consider c2102 amp optimum. Ma2275 integrated looks super and sounds like a 75% clone of 2200/2102, and better than other combos in one box. If you play exloud rock and have a exlarge room it might not be enough juice all other discussed are good matches or overkill.If you live around binghamton ny audio classics offers hundreds of bw-mac combos. Try as many till your happy, hopefully my rankings will fill in any gaps, before i get hassled 402 is more powerful and would be needed for panel type speakers but if wfa let you have electrostats and all that other boxes don't wimp out the 2102 sounds best in monobloc config which requires owner to flip a switch,and pony up another $6100.

The separates are better than the MA6900 but the MA6900 is a great unit itself! I've had the MA6900 and now have the C2102 and C2200 and love it! The tube pair is more natural sounding than the MA6900, but more money, more stuff, and more heat. TAS recently thought the Mcintosh 402/46 and 2102/2200 combos were some of the best they've ever heard, and agreed you can mix and match them. If you can, demo them. My local dealer had them all available for demo so it was easy. Knowing what i know now I would start with the separates.

I auditioned the MA6900 back-to-back with the C46/402 combo (with B&W N803) and the latter is definately better. However it also costs twice as much! I wouldn't say it was twice as good - they were quite similar overall - but there was more detail and ambience with the combo. That same day, we also played with the C45/252 combo and I think it was closer to the C46/402 than 6900 in terms of amount of detail. Otherwise, very very similar. Arthur

I am delighted to own the MC402 and the C2200 pre-amp combo. They really make my Meadowlark Blue Heron II's sing. I've had Pass Labs,Plinius, and several other high end amp, pre-amp combos. This is the most coherent, musical, accurate sound I've ever had. Haven't heard the MA6900, but this current line of Mcintosh equipment is a lot of quality sound for the money. Good luck.
Joe

I was using the MA6900 for awhile & now have upgraded to a MC352+Supratek Chardonnay triode pre .

MA6900 is an excellent integrated which will get you quite close to a C46+MC402. But i would take the C2200 over the C46. The c2200 will give you the so called tube ' MAGIC ' & will be more natural sounding IMO. Ofcourse this depends very much on your tastes.

Sometime ago I was auditioning the the MA6900 & we
by-passed the built in C42 pre in the MA6900 & connected the C2200 in the same system. The improvement was NOT subtle .Everything sounded "MUCH" better.

My speakers are also 87db ( TDL ref. monitors ) . I was using the Amp section of the MA6900 with the Supratek for a while. When i upgrated to the MC352 the main differences i noticed were in the Dynamics & bass. I did not expect
a big difference given that the MA6900 is 200W . But the 350W was really what my speakers needed i guess as the improvement in the bass area was HUGE. The TDL's are
rated 18hz-20Khz so this was a real bonus.

My suggestion to you would be to audition both combinations Vs the MA6900.If i were to do it again i would skip the integrated & go for the separates.
It really is worth the difference. Good luck !