Bryston BP-17^3 or McIntosh C49??
Assuming we survive the current crisis, a room update is in order. Will be adding furniture from Atocha Design (on order), and upgrading various components. One will be a pre-amp; sticking with Bryston amplifiers in all cases.
So: Option 1: BP-17 cubed, with installed phono card and external Chord DAC, likely Qutest. Stay in the Bryston family, not too terrible. Option 2: Mcintosh C-49 (opt for version II DAC card??) McIntosh look is iconic, the amp will not be visible; Bryston performance is top-notch. The McIntosh offers more features and has far more inputs then we would ever use. I do plan on using ROON, which may favor the McIntosh. This is two channel only, visual media in another spot. |
|
I’d go with a Bryston and an external DAC of your choosing. Take a look at my signature and you’ll see this is blasphemy!
Here’s why. I just don’t like the idea of building DAC’s into analog preamps. DAC’s are still changing faster than analog preamps. So why buy a box that may become obsolete due to it’s digital inputs? That, and McIntosh is using a version of an ESS delta-sigma DAC that has a specific sonic signature that you may or may not like. With a separate preamp and dac you have more flexibility to tailor the sound to your preference. Tom |
Another vote for the Bryston. Had a BP-17cubed and thought it was excellent. Have owned a few McIntosh solid-state preamps and the newer ones did not suit my taste. To be fair, that was 10yr+ ago. If were my $$ it would be Bryston.
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:04 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©Copyright 2009-2023 AudioAficionado.org.Privately owned, All Rights Reserved.