Compare and Contrast

Topic: McCormack DNA 225 or Conrad Johnson MF-2500: Which one and why?

Please discuss.

Thank you.

sydneysophia08-15-2003 1:31pm

sugarbrie Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 3,854 posts 08-15-2003 at 03:02pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Since CJ now owns McCormack, they will be happy either way!!
sean Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 6,231 posts 08-15-2003 at 03:37pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete That specific CJ model has very limited power bandwidth. This means reduced speed with a lack of leading edge information. I would suspect that it is somewhat veiled sounding with a lack of high frequency "air", resolution and transient "snap". If you like a slightly "soft" or "rounded" top end ( ala many tubed units ), it might work well for you. The McCormack is a far more advanced design and should sound markedly better. Which one you would like better would obviously be a matter of personal taste and system synergy. As Sugar stated, if you buy either of them new, the "parent company" will be happy : ) Sean >
unsound Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 7,329 posts 08-15-2003 at 08:21pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete While they both offer a rather liquid sound for solid state, they are different. The c-j being rounder, more laid back and can be current limited (lower impedances can make the bass a bit loose),the McCormack can be crisper (yet liquid),much tighter in the bass, and if not matched properly a bit forward and shouty. YMMV.