2. amps-preamps
  3. 1401783901

McIntosh C 2300 vs BAT VK-52SE/51SE

Hello I currently have a BAT VK-3I that I would like to upgrade. I am looking to buy used.

Was wondering which is the better performer? I know that the 52 is better then the 51. The 2300 has a phono preamp which I would not use. I currently have a BAT VK-P10SE that I will be using for the phono preamp. In the future for a power amp I was thinking along the lines of a McIntosh MC602.

Used 2300's go for around 4500 hundred. Used 51's go for around 3500 and more than likely have been used more. The 52 I do not see many of them for sale so I am not sure what they are going for.

The budget does matter but the thought process is that the 2300 is fairly new and may last me quite some time. The 51 is better on the budget but how long will it be before I am ready or need to move on due to its age. The 52 will be harder on the budget but like the 2300 will last me quite a while. If the thinking is that a 51 out performs a 2300 I may just go that route and in a few years see what happens then. Maybe upgrade to a 52 at that time.

Appreciate any responses.
warpig
effischer
560 posts
 
The C2300 is one of the best tube preamps ever made. If you don't plan on using it for vinyl, however, you can save some money going with the C2200. Guts are the same but the C2300 adds an extra MC phono section.

Good luck & happy listening!
warpig OP
5 posts
 
Beewax Thanks for the info. The MC602 will be down the line a little. I think my money currently would be best used towards a preamp.

Effischer Thanks also. I have not done that much research on the McIntosh equipment. This is kind of the first shot at it. Reading reviews really is kind of subjective. Unless the equipment is really bad. Its nice to get individuals input that may have had this equipment themselves.

Again Thanks
greg
jmcgrogan2's avatar
jmcgrogan2
6,346 posts
 
I know that the 52 is better then the 51.

How do you know this? Did you listen for yourself?

I thought they sounded different, the 52 had more bloom and sweetness, the 51 had more power and dynamics. I actually preferred the 51SE myself. Newer is not necessarily better, many times it's just different. As usual, YMMV.
warpig OP
5 posts
 
Jmcgrogan2 Truthfully I have not had the pleasure of hearing either of them. I am just going buy what I researched and have read. Unfortunately there is know way for me to make a comparison without buying each one.

As far as age goes I do know that electronics will go at some time and being older does not mean it will go first. I know capacitors will need to be replaced eventually. When will that be I have know idea. I am currently using a 3I which is fine. But I have a lot of other audio electronics that have gone out. I am an individual who can not and will not buy a system every few years.

Perhaps I should have stated it is my understanding that the 52 is better than the 51. If I have offended you I apologize.

Thanks for the input.
greg
jmcgrogan2's avatar
jmcgrogan2
6,346 posts
 
No need to apologize Greg, you didn't offend me at all. I just like to question statements of "facts" that stand out as curious to me. Since I had the opportunity to hear both, and I disagreed with your assessment, I just thought I'd throw in my $0.02 for what it's worth.

I agree with you about preamps ages and capacitor issues, especially within the BAT line. I've owned 9 pieces of BAT gear in my days, including 3 preamps. 2 of the 3 preamps had to have their caps replaced. I no longer own BAT gear, some of it due to a change in tastes, some of it due to cap issues.

Cheers,
John
More to discover