Vintage Asylum Classic gear from yesteryear; vintage audio standing the test of time.

---

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Vintage Asylum ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ] [ Edit ] [ Delete ]

---

Mc C-28 and MC2100 -Sorry for the long response

74.103.201.118

Posted by Brian Levy on May 12, 2007 at 07:01:40

In Reply to: Ya just gotta love them there church sales.... posted by Byrd69 on May 11, 2007 at 11:35:01:

Interesting reading about the feeling of the C28s. My comments have always been that what we hear is not what other hear and hence hence you need to audition for yourself to determine whether it is for you. ANY C-28 or preamp from that period as well as any amp will not sound the same now as it did in the late '60s without a thorough going through. Now unit was designed then, prior to then or after then to last so many decades without repair. Parts design have limitations and we have to live with an accept that as a fact of life.

I bought me 28 new and in all the years I've owned it have compared it to many alternatives that were excellent. Most I've owned, some were loaners and some were friends' units. The 28 did not exceed any of these units where they were strongest but, it seemed overall to have a more homogenized balanced weighting of all of the relevant factors that make the jump from a decent preamp to a great preamp. The final proof was usually over the months and even years I owned the other preamps none were able to wean me from needing the Mc fix as I call it indicating something was not just right overall from my perspective. Of all of them I've had, the Marantz 7c and the ARC SP3-A1 were the only alternative contenders that came close. Having had many 7Cs come and go through my systems the ARC was the preamp that finally drove the 7C permanently from my inventory. I've always said that the SP3 should have been the successor Marantz preamp to the 7C and not the 7T. The other preamp that really did well was the Van Alstine Super PAS3X with the buffered outputs. The example I had was beautiful and in retrospect I think I should have kept it. It's failing was the phono preamp but Frank had a fix to eliminate the problem with this early version that I never had him install though he offered to do it at no charge. It was the 1 preamp that I found the least change of sound with in a system when I compared it to a direct hi-level source input through a power amp. No amp I tried seemed to upset it in any way. If the phono preamp had been updated, it may have been good enough to sit with the ARC as a contender.

The other preamp that really was a killer was a company out of Montreal that was a startup and had a limited run of amps and preamp in the late '90s, I can not remember the name sadly. The owner and builder was a computer engineer who struck me in the same manner as Sul did when I first met him. The preamp was the first preamp since the 7C that struck me as this was a serious no compromise Rolls Royce, best of everything personal statement preamp. McIntosh while beautifully packaged and impressive in layout as they are regardless of model just does not elude the same response from me in the "pride of quality and workmanship" as Saul's tube and earliest SS units did.

Lastly, the Philips preamp I now have does not seem to do anything wrong and is easy to listen to. The sound is what most term neutral (I sense it strips out emotion within the recording and hence a neutral preamp for me is colored). I am keeping it along with the sister tuner and power amp though the tuner is getting the most use.

My 28 was sounding much like the detractors here described a few years ago and I was ready to move on when I had a problem with the channel balance. I brought it into a a local store who I trusted though not a Mc dealer and they went through it. A batch of caps in the unit were at their limits including several in the phono preamp. The tech and I talked and I told him I wanted to replace the jackset that seemed to require cleaning every 6 months; really affected the sound and cleaning the center hole was a pain. He was against it as it could affect the resale value but that is not an issue for me. At the time he suggested he try to quiet it down abit and I gave him permission to go to town. Jackset was replaced, a few more caps changed out more to improve sound than that they were out of spec and he rerouted some of the wiring, a rather well known "mod" amongst C28 owners. I little time consuming I understand as it involves scoping the noise levels and trial and error. The total cost was only a couple of hundred Canadian dollars and way less than I was willing or expected to pay and the unit was far better sounding than my evaluation notes from when I was evaluating it in the 1969 when I bought it. I've compared it to a C29 of known quality that I had compared it against a few years earlier as I was thinking of buying the 29 and where the 29 outshone the 28 in speed, detail and noise floor the 28 wiped it out on the second go around. The 29s phono section was the weak point on the 1st go around and that was fatal in considering buying it as I use 3 turntables. On the 2nd go around the differences in the phono section were much larger. The 29 owner has a standing offer in to buy the 28 if I should ever decide to sell it.

The sound of the 28 is not for everyone. I suspect that most who have spent the majority of their audio lives in the digital age will not appreciate it or will not until some year from now when they have more mature and refined audio training. Not a slap but, time, experiences, exposure and other factors all go into developing what we hear and how. It was designed to maintain the voicing of the late Mc tube era and therefore the sound identifies with the past more than the SS era designs. Frank did a better job at this voicing than any other company that tried to bridge the gap and while a big success then it now is a "weakness" for the preamp as it was not entirely successful and exhibits that it is a compromise sonically. Tube lovers site its failings achieving 100% of the finesse imparted by tubes and ss followers find fault that it does not exhibit the sonic character of mainstream SS preamps. Much of what I've said of the 28 applies to the power amps of the same generation from Mc, the 250, 2100, 2505 and 2105 though owners and others who actually have owned these when working right tend to be more appreciative of how good they are.

Someone said I have learned to live with the weaknesses of the 28 while in reality I have learned to live with its strengths and they far outweigh any weaknesses. Also, as I look for system synergy, my system overall is tuned to what I prefer and hear in a live classical acoustic concert. It took about 10 years decades ago to find the combination and about a few years had to go through the process again when my KLH Nines finally were retired. I was fortunate that on tis 2nd go around replacement speakers were found somewhat quickly and the faithful MC250 bought with the 28. The sonic character of the replacement Bozak Symphonys are quite similar to the Nines and after trying a few new amps I found the 2105 and it had the synergy but then again this was the series amp Rudy used in voicing the Symphony and CG in the '60s and early '70s. Again, if you get these amps have them gone though. Happily these are minimalists designed except for the metering circuits of the 2105 and 2505 and easy to work on. Again they may not be your cup of tea for the reason the 28 may not be but while just a few years ago they were looked down upon, they are now being grabbed up and on a dollar per watt cost are more expensive than several of the other used Mc amps and well respected amps from other companies.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Kimber Kable

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---