mcintosh vs jeff rowland

I recently sold a Rowland Continuum 500 and bought a McIntosh MA7000, driving a pair of Sonus Faber Guarneri Mementos. Thus far, I have not decided if I am happy with the transition. The Continuum was fully broken-in (and it did get better as time went by. . . it actually took several hundred hours of use to come into its own.)

The MA7000 is new, has minimal hours and I sincerely hope it will improve as it breaks-in. It does sound good, it just doesn't seem to equal the performance of the Rowland.

The main difference I have noticed is a lack of three dimensional soundstaging compared with the Rowland. The Mac does have an excellent soundstage, imaging is good, it just is not as transparent as was the Rowland.

I feel that things will get better as time goes by - I am just reporting on the here and now.

They are both great in their own right. The Mac will probably have a fuller sound. That is a sound that I prefer. just a little bit different in their presentation. Things will get better in time. Mcintosh gear sounds very 3 dimensional on many systems.

Thanks for the input. Regarding my system, my source is an esoteric
sa-60, and my speakers are a set of focal 1027be. I've also got a REL sub which I really like but basically never use.

Try rca instead of balanced into Mac. I am running both from Bryston BDA1 dac, switch on the fly. Mac is not balanced. Not close. But which is better?

I have the model 6's and really cant speak for the newer models. I have had many MAC's, enjoyed their sound...but never quite like the Rowlands.