I have several amps that I play around with. I found that the Mcintosh MA352 is very particular to the source, or the streamer and DAC. For instance, running the wiim pro I almost gave up on the Mcintosh and it sounded as poorly as you described. With the Bluesound Node and an upgraded external DAC, it sounds amazing . It takes time to get the right synergy, but there are amps out there that will be more airy, detailed, holographic, better transient response; but at same time there will be a trade off in richness, warmth, rounded notes - and those hyperdetailed amps can be a little screechy at times on violins, with harsher treble causing hearing damage and ear ringing. The Mcintosh is an amazing amp and I will always keep one in rotation, right now the Ma352 is my primary amp for violin concertos and orchestral music. Don’t get me wrong I love hyperdetailed , holographic, fast amps, and addicted to that sound too, but I think it’s really a trade off and side moves after a certain spend. Keep in mind, the amp is only a percentage of the sound signature, you can still make major adjustments with the source , DACs, cables, and of course speakers. So it's kind of hard to paint with a broad brush, everyone's system is different and can be made and tuned in ways that could be very specific to what you're looking for.
dCS Bartok Apex vs McIntosh DA2 - Trouble Hearing the Difference
I am currently playing a new set of Focal Scala Evos with a McIntosh MA9500, fed by a Wiim Pro playing Tidal Direct. This set up uses the McIntosh DA2, which sounds remarkable to my untrained ears.
I borrowed a dCS Bartok Apex from my local dealer. Given that I can run balanced out (using Transparent Reference Gen 6 cables) to the MA9500, I can switch inputs to compare the DA2 & Wiim vs the Bartok (DAC & Streaming) very quickly. I level matched the best I could.
What I am confused about, though, is just how close the DA2 sounds to the Bartok. The most noticeable difference is how forward and prevalent vocals are with the DA2. They seem anchored to the center image and several feet more forward into the room, whereas in the Bartok they are a bit more recessed, and integrated into the rest of the music. The Bartok soundstage is also wider, but not shockingly so. The sound is definitely smoother or "rounder" with the Bartok as compared to the DA2.
I admit I am relatively new to critical listening, but I think I expected the difference between the $20K Bartok and the built-in DA2 to be more profound. I'm not anxious to spend the money on the Bartok, but am willing to do if it is a significant step up, which I think it should be.
So what am I missing? Am I perhaps limited by the MA9500? My dealer doesn't love autoformer-based Mc products, but many do, so I would have thought the MA9500 is sufficiently resolving. Room acoustics are not the best, but certainly not terrible.
Interested in any thoughts or feedback.
- ...
- 49 posts total
If you are going to pit the Mac DAC against something closer to the price budget, consider the new Linear Tube Audio DAC. It is very reasonably priced and is winning accolades for value and quality. I believe that DAC would be a very different sound from your current setup. I have a much more expensive DAC setup but that would be a quick way to do an A/B comparison. You will need a separate streamer and high-quality USB cable, like an Innuos Zenith, but you'll still come out way better than the dCS unit. |
You might consider the WiiM Pro a bottleneck. It is a great value at $150 but I am just guessing it may not be up to the task of giving all the information required to get everything out of the Bartok Apex. The WiiM is a great value and sounds great for what it is but it is not the be all end all in terms of sources |
@verdantaudio - Good suggestion, but the Bartok is actually serving as both streamer (through Tidal Direct) as well as DAC. So it’s really Wiim & DA2 vs Bartok. |
- 49 posts total