McIntosh MC402

I know it doesn't make much sense, why would a company put out seperates if the int amp was as good sonically. I haved the c46/252 and love it, just curious, what differences did you hear when you went to the 200 and what powercords did you upgrade to ? thanks.

The C200 adds more air around voices recorded in a natural environment, more bass slam, better soundstaging, and an even better seperation of instruments. Another reason I went for it was the high class MC-phono stage. As far as the PCs are concerned, click on my system. The best is the Shunyata, closely followed by the Eichmann. As far as value for money is concerned, the clear victor was the LAT. However, when I added the Exact Power, the improvement was even more dramatic, and it became next to impossible to tell the different PCs from another. From what I know today, I would rather go for an excellent power conditioner first, and spend less money on PCs.

hi thanks for the info,heard good things about exact power,glad you like the c200 thanks

The ONLY way to know for certain the difference between components is to do a BLIND test. Anything less is MEANINGLESS as bias is introduced into the equation. I think it is significant that we have several different Mcintosh engineers stating that the difference sonically between components only comes into play if your speakers and or room require more power or base control. Otherwise there is NO difference. As for power cords I would be shocked if ANYONE could tell the difference ina BLIND test. In fact I challenge ANYONE to take such a blind test and notice a difference between a stock cord vs an aftermarket cord with any consistancy.

Benfmd, in fact the PC testing I did, in two different systems, with several friends, was blind testing. Everybody agreed the differences were as clear as changing an amp, for example. As for differences between amps - one cannot explain what one does not hear. Enjoy your integrated, then.