AudioAficionado.org  

Go Back   AudioAficionado.org > Manufacturers Forums > McIntosh Audio

McIntosh Audio A Tradition of Excellence

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-18-2021, 04:13 AM
70sMac's Avatar
70sMac 70sMac is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: The Berkshires
Posts: 557
Default MX units used for surround processing?

I was just told that certain MX units are equipped with circuitry that's capable of processing stereo music into surround sound. I was totally unaware of this, so I researched the Mac compendium and, much to my surprise, discovered the following information under MX151 features:

....2-channel source material can be played back in stereo or processed up to 7.1 multi-channel using Dolby Pro Logic IIx or DTS Neo: 6 decoding....

My question is if anyone on the Mac board has experience with using this processing and, if so, what results did you experience?

Thank you for your time
__________________
Bill in the Hills

OUR VINTAGE MAC: MAC4100, MAC4200 | AMPS: MC452, MC300 | MAC PRE/PROS: MX151, MX130, MX121 | B&W SPEAKERS: (2) N802s, (2) N805s, (1) HTM3S | NEWER EQUIPMENT: Oppo 203 & 105D, Sony X800M2, Denon CDR-W1500 | VIDEO DISPLAY: 65" LG OLED | IMPORTANT NOTE: Zero High-speed internet connections
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-18-2021, 06:40 AM
bart's Avatar
bart bart is offline
Life is beautiful
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 19,867
Default

Bill, I've done this with my Marantz processor.
I didn't like the result.
I prefer my music as 'natural' as possible.
__________________
Stereo: Hegel H590, Grimm Audio MU1, Mola Mola Tambaqui, Burmester 948 - V3 & V6 racks, Vivid Audio G2 Giyas, REL Carbon Special (pair), Silent Angel Bonn N8 Ethernet Switch & Forester F1, Wireworld Platinum Eclipse IC and SE SC, Furutech Digiflux
AV: Hegel C-53, Marantz AV8802A, Oppo BDP-203EU, Pioneer Kuro 60", Vivid Audio C1 & V1w's, Wireworld Platinum Eclipse, SE & E
Second system (veranda): Halgorythme preamp and monoblocks, Burmester 061, Avalon Avatar, Sharkwire & Wireworld cables
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-18-2021, 08:56 AM
esweter esweter is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 63
Default

I have the mx150 and it does this surprisingly well. Certainly not for an audiophile purist but depending on my mood and the music sometimes its fun to use. It's especially good when streaming tv shows on the HT system that are only in stereo. It gives a good surround sound effect. 99% of the time I listen to music on 2 channel system though.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-18-2021, 11:05 AM
W9TR's Avatar
W9TR W9TR is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: The Neutral Zone
Posts: 4,665
Default MX units used for surround processing?

Mixed results here. Some 2 channel video sources are mixed and encoded to use with Dolby ProLogic decoders. If you have a lot of these in your library it makes sense to use Dolby Prologic to decide them.

For normal 2 channel audio sources it’s a crapshoot. The Dolby Prologc decoder will take ambient and out of phase info and steer it to the rear channels. It does this in a manner that is somewhat unpredictable. Try it, you may like it on some things.
__________________
Main System:
Amati Futura Mains
Amati Homage VOX Center,
Proac Response 1sc Rears,
Three MC2301's for L,C,R
MC 602 for the rears
C 1100, MX 151, MCD 1100, MR 80
Nottingham Dais with Wave Mechanic
Sumiko Palo Santos Presentation

SurfacePro 3, RPi 4, ROON, WW Starlight Platinum USB, Schiit Yggdrasil, Benchmark DAC3 HGC

MX 151, OppO BDP-95, JVC RS-500 DILA projector, 106" diagonal Stewart Luxus Screenwall Deluxe with Studiotek 130 G3 material.

Lake House:
Ohm F, MC 275V, C2300, MR 77, Rega P3

OnDeck:
McIntosh MAC 4300v
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-18-2021, 11:33 AM
thughes thughes is offline
Senior Member

 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,314
Default

Years ago, ProLogic was the only show in town. My Marantz will default to it if I don't turn it off. Like others say, it's a mixed bag unless you have a collection of legacy sources that used ProLogic.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-19-2021, 07:15 PM
substance substance is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Laguna Niguel, CA USA
Posts: 294
Default

Is this a joke?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-22-2021, 09:58 PM
jdcarlson jdcarlson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Florida Panhandle
Posts: 56
Default Older MX units

McIntosh has been making units that will convert analog stereo signals into 5.1 ever since the MX118 and the MX130.
On the MX130, some units even have Dolby Processing and THX certification. I realize these have been left in the dust by current digital technology, but when they were first produced they were "top of the line."
Remember, these units were produced BEFORE digital was available at any reasonable cost to audiophiles.
I have an MX118 in my office system, and an MX130 in my home system.
Just remember - THESE UNITS ARE TOTALLY ANALOG! True, there was some minor digital circuitry in the early THX standards, but it was nothing like what is available now.
I use the MX118 at the office because of size limitations, and I do not play vinyl at the office. The MX130 is a larger unit (i.e., taller) and has phono inputs. It is the "brain" of my home system now.
The early MXxxx units suffer from a bad reputation because they were first marketed as Audio/Video units - at a time when all video was analog. Shortly after they hit the market, digital video hit the market - all of a sudden analog video units were viewed as worthless. McIntosh addressed the digital audio problem with the introduction of the MAC3 DA converter. But solving the video was not worth the expense.
Just ignore the video in these early units. Think of them as outstanding analog audio units. In that arena, they can hold their head high.
At age 76 I do not know that my ears could tell the difference between current leading digital products and my older analog system. But, to me the sound is pleasing from both units (MX118 and MX30). I like the MX130 because of its flexibility. Short of having a rack mounted patch panel, it is one of the more flexible units I know of from an input/output perspective. You can choose from 13 inputs and route them to any (or all) of four recorder outputs. It also has dual channel capability (i.e., I recorded 200 vinyl LPs to 192/24 digital files at the same time as my wife was using the other "channel" to listen to Oprah and Dr. Phil on the TV running through the MX130 system. There was absolutely NO cross talk!).
Although my "day job" was a CPA, in my early years I longed to be a jazz musician. I spent enough time in an orchestra pit or on a band stand to know what to listen for (I learned very early that unless one reached the "top echelon", the life of a musician is very much a "hand to mouth" existence - being CPA paid a lot better and very much more dependable).
As an illustration of knowing what to look for, I finally found a pair of KLH Model Nines (early full range electrostatic system - that I first heard in 1970) that have OUTSTANDING definition and "air" in their presentation.
So, my inability to tell much difference between my old analog 5.1 units and the newer digital units is a function of my decreased hearing ability due to age. I am not saying which is better - just with my present hearing I cannot tell any significant difference.
As an illustration of my hearing in the past, about 40 years ago I was at a venue after a musical group rehearsal, and the sound guys were trying to set up the system. They set a microphone up in the center of a venue (huge round building with cement block walls with cement floor and a domed roof (big enough to hold 10,000 people) - an acoustical nightmare) and turning up the gain on the system until they got a feedback squeal. They could not identify it - I recognized the squeal as approximately an "A" somewhere above middle "C". They had an equalizer in the system. I told them to cut back on 800 HZ (since "A" is 440 HZ - an octave up would be 880 HZ). The squeal stopped! All of a sudden they thought I was a genius with perfect pitch. But it was just that I had spent enough time "trying" to play music that I had decent recognition of relative pitch.
I do not know if I could still do that at age 76.
I do not know everything about music or acoustics, but I spent enough time as a player, conductor, and substitute recording engineer, in my early years, that I have learned a little bit. At my age the older analog McIntosh MXxxx units still sound great!.
So, do not dismiss the early analog MXxxx units for audio until you listen to them.
Thanks,
Jim
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-22-2021, 11:32 PM
70sMac's Avatar
70sMac 70sMac is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: The Berkshires
Posts: 557
Smile Hi Jim!

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdcarlson View Post
McIntosh has been making units that will convert analog stereo signals into 5.1 ever since the MX118 and the MX130.
On the MX130, some units even have Dolby Processing and THX certification. I realize these have been left in the dust by current digital technology, but when they were first produced they were "top of the line."
Remember, these units were produced BEFORE digital was available at any reasonable cost to audiophiles.
I have an MX118 in my office system, and an MX130 in my home system.
Just remember - THESE UNITS ARE TOTALLY ANALOG! True, there was some minor digital circuitry in the early THX standards, but it was nothing like what is available now.
I use the MX118 at the office because of size limitations, and I do not play vinyl at the office. The MX130 is a larger unit (i.e., taller) and has phono inputs. It is the "brain" of my home system now.
The early MXxxx units suffer from a bad reputation because they were first marketed as Audio/Video units - at a time when all video was analog. Shortly after they hit the market, digital video hit the market - all of a sudden analog video units were viewed as worthless. McIntosh addressed the digital audio problem with the introduction of the MAC3 DA converter. But solving the video was not worth the expense.
Just ignore the video in these early units. Think of them as outstanding analog audio units. In that arena, they can hold their head high.
At age 76 I do not know that my ears could tell the difference between current leading digital products and my older analog system. But, to me the sound is pleasing from both units (MX118 and MX30). I like the MX130 because of its flexibility. Short of having a rack mounted patch panel, it is one of the more flexible units I know of from an input/output perspective. You can choose from 13 inputs and route them to any (or all) of four recorder outputs. It also has dual channel capability (i.e., I recorded 200 vinyl LPs to 192/24 digital files at the same time as my wife was using the other "channel" to listen to Oprah and Dr. Phil on the TV running through the MX130 system. There was absolutely NO cross talk!).
Although my "day job" was a CPA, in my early years I longed to be a jazz musician. I spent enough time in an orchestra pit or on a band stand to know what to listen for (I learned very early that unless one reached the "top echelon", the life of a musician is very much a "hand to mouth" existence - being CPA paid a lot better and very much more dependable).
As an illustration of knowing what to look for, I finally found a pair of KLH Model Nines (early full range electrostatic system - that I first heard in 1970) that have OUTSTANDING definition and "air" in their presentation.
So, my inability to tell much difference between my old analog 5.1 units and the newer digital units is a function of my decreased hearing ability due to age. I am not saying which is better - just with my present hearing I cannot tell any significant difference.
As an illustration of my hearing in the past, about 40 years ago I was at a venue after a musical group rehearsal, and the sound guys were trying to set up the system. They set a microphone up in the center of a venue (huge round building with cement block walls with cement floor and a domed roof (big enough to hold 10,000 people) - an acoustical nightmare) and turning up the gain on the system until they got a feedback squeal. They could not identify it - I recognized the squeal as approximately an "A" somewhere above middle "C". They had an equalizer in the system. I told them to cut back on 800 HZ (since "A" is 440 HZ - an octave up would be 880 HZ). The squeal stopped! All of a sudden they thought I was a genius with perfect pitch. But it was just that I had spent enough time "trying" to play music that I had decent recognition of relative pitch.
I do not know if I could still do that at age 76.
I do not know everything about music or acoustics, but I spent enough time as a player, conductor, and substitute recording engineer, in my early years, that I have learned a little bit. At my age the older analog McIntosh MXxxx units still sound great!.
So, do not dismiss the early analog MXxxx units for audio until you listen to them.
Thanks,
Jim
I'm a bit younger than you are, but your words still make great sense to me. In fact, much of what folks find to be "a giant leap forward" these days makes very little sense to me. For example, we've owned and enjoyed a Mac MX130 for many years and, quite frankly, it still sounds damn near as good as anything else we've ever heard in 2-channel stereo mode. If it weren't for the fact that we have a keen interest in creating our first 5.1 surround system -- in a new listening area -- we would still be smiling away as we allow our MX130 to run the stereo show.

By the way, my dear departed father was a CPA, so your thoughts are especially well-taken by the folks up here on the mountain.
__________________
Bill in the Hills

OUR VINTAGE MAC: MAC4100, MAC4200 | AMPS: MC452, MC300 | MAC PRE/PROS: MX151, MX130, MX121 | B&W SPEAKERS: (2) N802s, (2) N805s, (1) HTM3S | NEWER EQUIPMENT: Oppo 203 & 105D, Sony X800M2, Denon CDR-W1500 | VIDEO DISPLAY: 65" LG OLED | IMPORTANT NOTE: Zero High-speed internet connections
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-01-2021, 02:49 AM
AVphile's Avatar
AVphile AVphile is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 86
Default

Theta Digital developed a proprietary matrixing capability for their Casablanca III and newer preamp/processor, along with multiple Dolby and DTS ones. Their proprietary one is simply remarkable in its ability to stabilize placement without degrading the sound quality. Most of the time, I listen to streaming in 7 versus 2 channel. It simply seems to sound better.
__________________
Jonathan
"Do not go quietly into that good night,
. . . Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

Main System: Theta Casablanca V preamp/processor; Wadia 8 CD transport and Digimaster DDC 2000 DAC (w/all updates); Theta Compli CD transport; Oppo UDP-203 disc player; Lumin T2 music server/DAC; Roon Nucleus+ core (w/Teddy Pardo LPS); SOTA Sapphire turntable (w/ Premier FT3 arm and Hana SL cartridge); SugarCube SC-2 non-destructive "click and pop" removal device; PS Audio Stellar phono preamp; Magnum Dynalab MD-102 FM tuner (w/MD-205 Signal Sleuth FM antenna amplifier and ST-2 FM antenna); McIntosh MC 611 (3), Krell FPB 200C, and KAV-250a power amplifiers; Revel Ultima Studio (2 - L&R), Voice (1 - center), and Embrace (2 sides and 2 surrounds) speakers; SVS PB-16 Ultra (2) and 3000 Micro (2) powered subwoofers; WireWorld Silver Eclipse 8 speaker cables; various Kimber Kable, MIT, Shunyata, and WireWorld interconnects; Shunyata Denali 2000/T (2), Denali 6000/S, Hydra [original], Hydra 2, and Venom PS10 power conditioners; various Shunyata Delta, Venom, PowerSnake, and Sidewinder power cords, and Venom Defenders (2); Richard Gray's Power Company Substation and 400 Pro; Luxul AGS-1024 Ethernet switch; Sound Anchor amplifier stand; VTI (2) and Billy Bags (4) equipment racks.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-11-2021, 06:23 PM
rjinaz86323 rjinaz86323 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: Chino Valley, AZ
Posts: 99
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdcarlson View Post
The MX130 is a larger unit (i.e., taller) and has phono inputs. It is the "brain" of my home system now. Just ignore the video in these early units. Think of them as outstanding analog audio units. In that arena, they can hold their head high.
Thanks,
Jim
I do not do anything fancy, just listen to 2 channel music. Would I be better off with something like a C28 over an MX130. I can afford either one, but the C28 is a little higher

Thx
Rick ( Chino Valley, AZ)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Audioaficionado.org tested by Norton Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:41 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©Copyright 2009-2023 AudioAficionado.org.Privately owned, All Rights Reserved.
Audio Aficionado Sponsors
AudioAficionado Subscriber
AudioAficionado Subscriber
Inspire By Dennis Had
Inspire By Dennis Had
Harmonic Resolution Systems
Harmonic Resolution Systems
Wyred4Sound
Wyred4Sound
Dragonfire Acoustics
Dragonfire Acoustics
GIK Acoustics
GIK Acoustics
Esoteric
Esoteric
AC Infinity
AC Infinity
JL Audio
JL Audio
Add Powr
Add Powr
Accuphase - Soulution
Accuphase - Soulution
Audio by E
Audio by E
Canton
Canton
Bryston
Bryston
WireWorld Cables
WireWorld Cables
Stillpoints
Stillpoints
Bricasti Design
Bricasti Design
Furutech
Furutech
Shunyata Research
Shunyata Research
Legend Audio & Video
Legend Audio & Video