Mac 402 vs 6900

I also have 2.3's and am in the process of purchasing either the 6900 interg ,402, or 501. Not sure if I'll go with a pre or drive directly from a Wadia cd. Hopefully some one responds to Lrskys question. Power requirements vs. sound quallity, not volumn is my delima.

The 402 is supposed to be a little faster - like the 602 from what I hear - but I'd say that it will still have McIntosh sound (hopefully). My buddy loves his Thiels but he complains about how each inch he moves them, the sound changes (he uses McIntosh MC300 amp). You may want to experiment with yours. His bass changes drastically with placement. I have heard the 6900 shake walls (on Dynaudio speakers - forgot the model but they were really big) so you may simply have a suckout problem. good luck. Arthur

By adding the MC402 you'll get a more dynamic sound than from the 6900. You're adding 200 more watts of power so it'll be able to control you're speakers a lot better....On a side not Lrsky on the 402 and 6900 they have autoformers...it doesn't matter what ohm load you spec it out at ...2,4,8 they're all 200w on the 6900 or 400w on the 402

I recently upgraded from a McIntosh MA6500 integrated, which sonically is close enough to a MA 6900, to a C200 preamp-MC402 amp-combination. Speakers are Shahinian Diapason, very power-hungry speakers if they are to show their best. For a couple of months i ran the C200 to the power amp-section of the MA6500 power amp section. Last to arrive was the MC402, and I can assure you the difference was not only noticable, but huge - especially as far as bass control was concerned. in addition, you'll get a huger, better defined soundstage, even better voices, more air around voices and instruments, and other improvements. Having said that, I'd like to add that the difference after changing the preamp was at least even more significant than of the power amp.

Hassel, Did you ever compare the Mcintosh C200 and MC402 to the C2200 and/or MC2102? I'm curious how these compare (tube vs SS).