[HiFiHawaii808]

Well...the MHA-200 isn't an OTL - which makes it more versatile IMO than Bottlehead/Feliks etc. This will drive a wider variety of cans - but if you've only got one set of cans it may not matter.

I know that which is why I want to upgrade. I would love to see a shoot out between the Macintosh MHA200, the ZMF Pendant SE and the Primaluna Evo 100. They are all in the same price bracket and have transformers on the output with multiple output impedances for low and high impedance headphones.

 

[Nostoi]

I am thinking the same thing. I want to upgrade from my Bottlehead crack. I want to know which sounds better. This amp. ZMF Pendant SE or Primaluna Evo 100.

Yep I'm deciding between this or the Pedant SE. I need to wait for the hype on this to level off and more impressions to come in before making a choice.

 

[HiFiHawaii808]

Yep I'm deciding between this or the Pedant SE. I need to wait for the hype on this to level off and more impressions to come in before making a choice.

Maybe they will all be present at CanJam Socal?

 

[Nostoi]

Maybe they will all be present at CanJam Socal?

Possibly. I'm in Vienna where there's actually a pretty large number of shops that stock Mcintosh amps, so probably I can demo soon.

 

[Crowbar44]

Yep I'm deciding between this or the Pedant SE. I need to wait for the hype on this to level off and more impressions to come in before making a choice.

So I listened to the MHA-200 for about an hour this morning as well. I've heard the Feliks Euphoria in the past - but my recollection fades...

One thing I feel confident in saying is that the MHA-200 doesn't sound like a super warm, gooey tube amp with the rolled highs, flabby bass, and lucious midrange typically associated with such. It's really accurate, musical...and fast. The bass goes way down and is pretty tight, the highs aren't rolled per say, but the sharp edges are moderated nicely. I'm quite pleased with it and it's a nice upgrade for me. I'm going to listen with the Sennheiser's tonight.

One issue I'm running into is that McIntosh recommends keeping the MHA's volume knob at unity (12:00) if the upstream source has a volume pot (like my setup does...I'm essentially using my Asgard 3 MB as a DAC/Pre-amp), and then using the volume pot on the upstream component. When I do this I can't get the volume I need with my setup - but when I do the opposite of what McIntosh recommends (i.e. keep the Schiit at unity and use the MHA-200's volume control) then I can get ear bleeding levels of volume...

 

[Nostoi]

So I listened to the MHA-200 for about an hour this morning as well. I've heard the Feliks Euphoria in the past - but my recollection fades...

One thing I feel confident in saying is that the MHA-200 doesn't sound like a super warm, gooey tube amp with the rolled highs typically associated with such. It's really accurate, musical...and fast. I'm quite pleased with it and it's a nice upgrade for me. I'm going to listen with the Sennheiser's tonight.

One issue I'm running into is that McIntosh recommends keeping the MHA's volume knob at unity (12:00) if the upstream source has a volume pot (like my setup does...I'm essentially using my Asgard 3 MB as a DAC/Pre-amp), and then using the volume pot on the upstream component. When I do this I can't get the volume I need with my setup - but when I do the opposite of what McIntosh recommends (i.e. keep the Schiit at unity and use the MHA-200's volume control) then I can get ear bleeding levels of volume...

Ok, thanks. That's interesting and good to know it's accurate and fast rather than overly warm (which I'm not a fan of).

What's the reason for keeping the MHA volume knob at 12 - to avoid potential clipping/distortion?

 

[HiFiHawaii808]

Possibly. I'm in Vienna where there's actually a pretty large number of shops that stock Mcintosh amps, so probably I can demo soon.

Last month, I paired my VC with a Primaluna Evo 400 and it was the best I've ever heard them. This is why I want to get the Primaluna Evo 100 in the mix to see how they all compare.

 

[Nostoi]

Last month, I paired my VC with a Primaluna Evo 400 and it was the best I've ever heard them. This is why I want to get the Primaluna Evo 100 in the mix to see how they all compare.

Looks like a beautiful amp. Sadly, the footprint is too big for me - I need something compact, which is why it's a shootout between MHA200 vs. Pendant.

 

[Crowbar44]

I know that which is why I want to upgrade. I would love to see a shoot out between the Macintosh MHA200, the ZMF Pendant SE and the Primaluna Evo 100. They are all in the same price bracket and have transformers on the output with multiple output impedances for low and high impedance headphones.

I agree...all the amps you listed live in the same space as the MHA-200 and a shootout would be fantastic - and helpful.

I reached out to Headfonia to see if they were interested in reviewing the MHA-200...and they said they weren't. Traditionally McIntosh never sent their gear out for review and relied on their dealer network exclusively to drive sales. They're better nowadays and you'll see some of their gear reviewed in Stereophile or TAS...but I don't know that they've gotten on board with the newer gen of internet-only reviewers...I worry we may not see "official" reviews for a while, and suspect this thread may be the primary source for impressions for a large proportion of buyers...

 

[jonathan c]

I agree...all the amps you listed live in the same space as the MHA-200 and a shootout would be fantastic - and helpful.

I reached out to Headfonia to see if they were interested in reviewing the MHA-200...and they said they weren't. Traditionally McIntosh never sent their gear out for review and relied on their dealer network exclusively to drive sales. They're better nowadays and you'll see some of their gear reviewed in Stereophile or TAS...but I don't know that they've gotten on board with the newer gen of internet-only reviewers...I worry we may not see "official" reviews for a while, and suspect this thread may be the primary source for impressions for a large proportion of buyers...

What is worrisome about that? If “impressions” lead to audition then to purchase, . If one buys without an audition, caveat emptor.

 

[Crowbar44]

What is worrisome about that? If “impressions” lead to audition then to purchase, . If one buys without an audition, caveat emptor.

You mean like I did - buying without reviews, impressions, or even a demo! Agree it, could have been an expensive mistake - glad it wasn't...

 

[HiFiHawaii808]

You mean like I did - buying without reviews, impressions, or even a demo! Agree it, could have been an expensive mistake - glad it wasn't...

Well, it makes for a fantastic avatar. The Macintosh is a beautiful amp.

 

[Crowbar44]

Ok, thanks. That's interesting and good to know it's accurate and fast rather than overly warm (which I'm not a fan of).

What's the reason for keeping the MHA volume knob at 12 - to avoid potential clipping/distortion?

I *think* that unity (12:00) takes the pot out of the signal path on the MHA-200 - there's even a detent at 12:00 that you can feel when turning.

 

[warrenpchi]

The bass performance was excellent...example:
1) On Amber Rubarth's "Sessions from the 17th Ward" "Strive" has some incredibly punchy percussion, the transients were amazing. The soundstage on this Chesky recording is also outstanding, it was amazing on the MHA-200...much wider and open than the Asgard 3.
2) Billie Eilish "Bad Guy"...wow...just wow, no breakup, seemed to reach much deeper than the Asgard 3

Treble is "tubey" and non-fatiguing.
1) On Crucifixus by The Sixteen and Harry Christophers (Early Music - think Gregorian Chant) there are some ear bleeding, female, highs, that I have always found hard to take, although I love this piece. I found these highs actually bearable on the MHA-200

Instrument separation is great...but the difference between the Asgard 3 was subtler with Classical recordings, the MHA-200 really shines with more intimate music (chamber, jazz quartet, etc.), complex orchestral pieces are extreemly well done, but differences between other amps is subtler
1) Vivaldi's RV 563 By Sir Neville Marriner and the Academy of St Martin in the Fields was quite similar to the Asgard 3
2) Same goes for Corelli with Philharmonia Baroque
3) Jazz at the Pawnshop (Chesky Records) is an exception FANTASTIC instrument separation...best I've heard, and I know this recording very well.

Added to index... and now I need to go listen to those tracks!

I am thinking the same thing. I want to upgrade from my Bottlehead crack. I want to know which sounds better. This amp. ZMF Pendant SE or Primaluna Evo 100.

Yep I'm deciding between this or the Pedant SE. I need to wait for the hype on this to level off and more impressions to come in before making a choice.

As luck would have it, I remember seeing quite a few Pendants for sale in the Classifieds last week. There might be a good deal, or two, to be found there?

Maybe they will all be present at CanJam Socal?

Even if they are not, I'm sure @TSAVJason would be.

So I listened to the MHA-200 for about an hour this morning as well. I've heard the Feliks Euphoria in the past - but my recollection fades...

One thing I feel confident in saying is that the MHA-200 doesn't sound like a super warm, gooey tube amp with the rolled highs, flabby bass, and lucious midrange typically associated with such. It's really accurate, musical...and fast. The bass goes way down and is pretty tight, the highs aren't rolled per say, but the sharp edges a moderated nicely. I'm quite pleased with it and it's a nice upgrade for me. I'm going to listen with the Sennheiser's tonight.

Yes, I think I know exactly what you mean, and I agree! For me, it's not so much that it doesn't sound like a tube amp, more like it doesn't sound like a stereotypical tube amp. I'll need some time to fully coalesce my feelings on this, but I'm not going to do that right at this moment because I'm just having too much damn fun right now.

One issue I'm running into is that McIntosh recommends keeping the MHA's volume knob at unity (12:00) if the upstream source has a volume pot (like my setup does...I'm essentially using my Asgard 3 MB as a DAC/Pre-amp), and then using the volume pot on the upstream component. When I do this I can't get the volume I need with my setup - but when I do the opposite of what McIntosh recommends (i.e. keep the Schiit at unity and use the MHA-200's volume control) then I can get ear bleeding levels of volume...

I *think* that unity (12:00) takes the pot out of the signal path on the MHA-200 - there's even a detent at 12:00 that you can feel when turning.

Yes, but like you, their recommendation still feels ass backwards to me from how I normally set up my sources/amps (fixed > attenuation). I suppose it's possible that swinging one way or another engages two (or more) completely separate pots, and would love to know more about why McIntosh recommends this.

 

[warrenpchi]

Okay, the 30-minute auto off feature is starting to irritate me a little bit.