McIntosh C-2200 or C-46 with MC-402???


Okay, a question for McIntosh users (or those familiar with the gear) out there -- need some advice and input!

You're setting up an MC-402 in your system and feeling awfully good about life. Now, you decide to chuck your other (very nice) preamps and put together a matching set. Why not, right?

The obvious choices are the 2200 tubed preamp and the 46 solid state preamp.

I've heard all these pieces, but have not been able to audition them as above (switching preamps, that is).

I generally like the "euphonic" quality of tubes, but always notice the trade-off in fine detail when you move back to solid state. Apples, oranges. I'm wondering if the 2200 is one of those rare pieces that gives you tube joy without the losses? How about matching up to the amp? Big money, big decision, so I'd appreciate your answers!
highdudgeon
I have read these responses and wow do I ever get a different reaction. I own both the c2200 and the c46, I also have the 252 and the 2751v. I totally enjoy them all,veiled is not a word I would use to describe the c46,but we all hear what we hear. 1st off I have found with Mac gear if you use balanced interconnects the "life" just goes out of the music. To me without question single ended sounds much better....and I am using cheap interconnects.

Yes the c2200 gives you the "tube" thing and does it very nicely. I also find the C46 to be very musical and involving. Lately I have been using the c46 with the 252 and the c2200 with the 275...all with great results.

I can honestly say I like both sets eqaully and yes they do different things. Sometimes I feel like the tube thing, othertimes I feel like listening to the SS thing.

Ultimately you need to hear both in your home ( I know maybe tough to do) but all I can say is just last night I was listening to the c46/252 and when I was done I just stood back and said....man that sounds good.
Great comments -- I really appreciate it.

The other contenders that come to mind (used) would be a Mac C-100 or an ARC Ref II Mk II (or LS25). I understand the C-200 is basically the same thing.

Any comments on these, or comparisons to the above?

The thing is, I'm not a tweaker. I had one system for years and years, and now I'm looking to "finalize" another system that I'll have while my hairline does some serious receding.
i demo'ed the c100 in my home & i hated every single thing about it,call me old fashioned but to me tone controls are a must,in my rig the c100 sounded allmost "tinny",if your local mac dealer is any good he shouldnt have a problem arringing for a few in home demo's of the current preamps.
I also own a MC402 amp that I use in a 2-channel and home theater set up that are in the same room. I am typically a tube guy all the way when it comes to 2 channel. I have a pair of Viva Aurora SET amps which I love, but the MC-402 is very very good. I found excellent results with an Air Tight ATC-2 pre-amp (tubes) which is my long term keeper preamp. I have not owned any of the Mac preamps to comment, but have had many solid state pre's in my system which all seem to lack the magic I get with a good tube preamp.
I'm in exactly the same boat. Took delivery on my 402 last week and had the C2200 in house for audition wtih it over the weekend. I previously had the 402/C46 combo in house for audition and that's what I based my purchase decision on.

I found no veils (Stereovox and AU24 interconnects, Stereovox speaker cable)....only a very tough decision. In my room and system, the C46 seemed to present a larger soundstage (the 402 that I listened to with the C46 was the dealers, thus was well broken in and mine now only has 20 hours on it).

The C2200/402 renders vocals fantastically.

Both are relaxed....I couldn't detect any substantive difference in detail between the two and didn't perceive any lacking.

I'm leaning toward the C2200.