advertisement


Luxman/Accuphase/Yamaha - Quality?

A wee curveball/opportunity has now maybe come back my way - that local-to-me Mac integrated may become available again. I daresay it might not quite equal the Luxman but is a LOT cheaper and I intend to check it out regardless. Typical, huh? So, push the boat out (big style) for the Lux, or get the used Mac; both *very* compelling choices...
 
Dunno - it could be, in theory, but even if not it won't lose value as it's the one that was in the classifieds at a very reasonable price and would be able to sell on reasonably easily if it didn't float my boat. But just to further complicate things, I have a really good deal on the 590AX-II net of trading in my existing amp. Still a hell of a lot more than that Mac though....
 
Personally, from all your musings thus far the 590AX-II has by far the strongest chance of being ‘that’ final amp. I’d go all out and get it done once and for all. Then there’s only music!!

I’m not a valve person (yet, maybe) SS is stable and hassle free.
 
Based on various calculations, the cost-to-change difference between used Mac and new Luxman is £3.5k. (That assumes I can get £500 easily for my 520, which it ought to get and then some.) It is tempting to be gung-ho about such things, and in any case I could buy the Mac and demo the Luxman, and defer the choice (since the Luxman demo won't be for a week or two).... ah, fun and games. All I know is that I was gutted when the Mac was withdrawn from sale, as it ticks all the boxes in many ways, and it was only that that persuaded me to start looking at more expensive options. But,.... final amps..... heh heh :)
 
JTC said:
One thing (apart from the meters) that appeals about the 590AX-II is the in-built MC stage. Is it too much to dare wish it is good enough to do away without a phono stage in the £500-1k range? That'd be a BIG plus in its favour....
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how the phono stage is implemented on the Luxman, but with the Accuphase both phono and DAC stages use plug-in modules. The demo one I borrowed had both fitted. I wasn't interested in the phono stage, and the DAC, although decent enough, wasn't a patch on my Chord DAVE/M-Scaler combination. Something to bear in mind though - my dealer did suggest I removed both modules and listen without them. A good suggestion because the amp certainly sounded better as a consequence.
 
Old Shatterhand said:
First: Mc or McI, not Mac. Frank McIntosh has no a in his name. https://www.mcintoshlabs.com/brand/mcintosh-heritage A Mac = Macintosh was an apple product ;)
Click to expand...
Have a look at the logo to the left side of the dial:
649144565_large_37e3b5d06a098ab939e10771672297d5.jpg

McIntosh themselves used the name 'MAC' for a line of receivers during the late 60's and early 70's!
 
I know that, but the brands name is McIntosh, not MacIntosh. The recommendation in this thread was about amplifiers from the brand = McIntosh not some 60-70th. Mac receivers.;)
 
Suffolk Tony said:
I'm not sure how the phono stage is implemented on the Luxman, but with the Accuphase both phono and DAC stages use plug-in modules. The demo one I borrowed had both fitted. I wasn't interested in the phono stage, and the DAC, although decent enough, wasn't a patch on my Chord DAVE/M-Scaler combination. Something to bear in mind though - my dealer did suggest I removed both modules and listen without them. A good suggestion because the amp certainly sounded better as a consequence.
Click to expand...
Just for info, the phono stage board in the Accuphase is configurable for MM/MC, with a variety of loading options via dip switches. It may therefore be more flexible than the inbuilt Luxman stage, if that's a consideration. Having heard it, it is very good and certainly better than or equivalent to standalone stages at the same price point that I've heard it against (it's around £1k if memory serves).
 
I have a feeling that, generally and originally, Mac********* would tend to be from Ireland and Mc******** from Scotland.
 
Mike Reed said:
I have a feeling that, generally and originally, Mac********* would tend to be from Ireland and Mc******** from Scotland.
Click to expand...
But how would you pronounce McIntosh? It might be proper to say mick-intosh (like McQueen), but I've only ever heard it (the audio company's name) pronounced mack-intosh (like the computer). So it kind of makes sense to me to call it Mac for short (like they apparently did 50 years ago), not Mc. :)
 
My M-60 monos. The first monos Accuphase ever made from 1975.

I am actually using them at the moment. Completely original no parts replaced, they still sound fine. Even the huge ELNA reservoir caps look in superb condition.

I know I know, I am living on borrowed time and they should be re-capped. I'm not listening, LOL. These amps still sound very good.

Personally I love the aesthetic. In practise they can dump over 500 Watts into 4 Ohms, but are rated for 450W by Accuphase.

Probably fairly rare these days especially in this condition.

That's an old pic from my previous house.

fa621433c5ffecec872826f05722f4f7.jpg
 
Has any one had the opportunity of demoing Accuphase separates ie the C-2450 or 2850 pre and the A-48 or 75 pa in combination ?? Both pa's are Class A amps. Just curious. I have heard the E-800 integrated with an ND555 source and Spendor speakers and been very impressed, The Class A sound is to me so relaxing and musical and I think I prefer it to the Naim 552/500 combo when playing classical music.
 
Mike Reed said:
I have a feeling that, generally and originally, Mac********* would tend to be from Ireland and Mc******** from Scotland.
Click to expand...
Other way around I reckon. MacDonald, Mackay, Macleod etc. Though I daresay if you trace the etymology they'll probably be interchangeable....
 
booja30 said:
But how would you pronounce McIntosh? It might be proper to say mick-intosh (like McQueen),
Click to expand...

Pronunciation of Mackay or similar integrated name is always 'mac', though 'Mc' will be pronounced 'mk' Think this unpronounced syllable is called a schwa (but my memory is hazy on that one). Ergo, McQueen is definitely Mk Queen (MickQueen?) and Macdonald is 'mac'. Anyway, this is how I hear it, but I guarantee there'll be exceptions !!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top