Mark Levinson No: 333 vs. MCintosh MC 352?

Thanks for all of your opinions. I did go on Audioreview.com and it seems like the MC352 is the winner compared to the ML 333 in sound quality, but the ML 333 looks gorgeous and it is a little hard to back away too.I am trying to convince myself it's the sound that I'm looking for, not the looks of the amp, but I still couldn't make the decision. I really need as much help as possible to choose the right amp between the two and Lev335, I listened ML 335 once at the dealers. It sounds really good, but I can't afford it right now. Thanks.

Come on... how does one compare Mac to Levinson.Buy the Mac!

Some of these responses are a joke, and I probably don't have near the expeience that some of you do.

We all have our biased opinions as to the sound we like, talk to a Linnie, I've known some and just came from a Linn shop this afternoon, they are the least desireable salespeople to deal with!

I have owned the 383 and I miss it! I also have heard the MC352 and it is on the tops of my list if I can afford one.

I am sure my opening line ruffles feathers, but just because a certain brand is not, or is, your cup of tea doesn't mean the other is terrible.

At one of the stores I was at today, they had Musical Fidelity and I wanted to hear the A3CR power amp; after that I had them switch to the Bryston 4B ST, on the same equipment; for my tastes it was the Bryson all the way. Yet, according to Stereophile the MF is Class A and the Bryston Class B.

Another example, there is no shortage of users happy with the MC352, yet I know a guy that owned a MC500, which listed for more than the MC352, and replaced it with a 332/331, can't remember which, and he said the ML bettered it in every way.

I also talked with another that owned or was very familiar with the MC500, in fact, Ljgj I believe, and they concurred that they were not as thrilled with it, but the less expensive 352 garners praise.

You are right I did find I liked the 352 better than the 500. The dealer recommended the 352 over it also. Really we are talking about all very good amps here though.

The reason people find the MC-352 to sound better than the MC-500 is the design and configuration of the 352 is better than that of the older 500. The 352 truly sounds better than the 500, but the 602 blows the 352 out of the water.
I better, it is substantially more money. I have owned the MC-500 and went to the 352 and for some time used them to push a pair of Vertias 2.8's, B&W 801II, and recently the 802N's. The 352 is a fabulous amp, AS LONG AS YOU DO NOT have 85-86db speakers. At loud levels (for which I prefer)
it doesn't have the capabilities to push them. There is a set of monoblocks that will sound MUCH better than the 352 for about 1/2 the price of the 352, in used $'s. The older (and very ugly, might I add) Carver Silver 7t's. Ugly, but LOADS of power, headroom, bottom and top end! Very detailed, and if not open the to the nakes eyes, one of the BEST valued amps available at ANY level! For what it is worth, I have to say, I also bought a Citation 7.1 and BIAMPED the 802N's, and THAT sounded better then the 352!

IMHO

Dan