Mcintosh C50 Preamp

Hi I own a C50 preamp and imho the internal dac sucks.Its nice in the mids,but very soft at the high low extremes. And this comes with using many digital cables some of which are now for sale. I believe your dac (which I've heard) is far superior.I use an Electrocompaniet
ECD-1 dac which upsamples everthing to 24/192 and kills the internal MAC dac and many other btw.Very analog sounding. Just my two cents,hope this helps.Others may offer different opinions but that's what I hear in my system.

I feel you would find the C50 a notable step up from the VTL and Moon combo.  It has one of the best SS phono sections out there and is far more complete of a preamp than the VTL with both XLR and RCA I/O for everything along with multiple zone outputs and tone controls.  You would likely find it more synergistic with the MC275; tighter & more defined.

The DAC in the C50 is not as fully featured as the Exogal - up to 32 bit 192 kHz maximum and no DSD.  In my application, it's just fine and light years beyond the DAC in my computer.  Not knowing how important digital performance is to you, I can't give you further input here.  FWIW, the C50 does have more I/C choices for the DAC (USB, RCA & TOSLINK).

Your threads don't list exactly what kind of table, arm and cartridge you're running now, so that might be the deciding factor.  If you're running a better LOMC and/or an arm that has VTA on-the-fly, it's probably worth the switch.  If you're not that far into vinyl on the other hand, perhaps not.

Good luck & happy listening!

IMO the C50 will certainly be more enjoyable than the VTL preamp.  I spent a years time with the VTL 2.5...rolled tubes, interconnects, power cables.  Could not get the sound I wanted out of it.  VTL 2.5 was replaced by Joule Electra LA-150 MK II and then McIntosh C42, both of which bested the VTL easily in my setup. I also used a McIntosh C47 briefly in order to hear what Mc had done with the DAC in these new preamps.  My Lampizator made the C47 DAC sound like a toy.  So, YES to the Mc SS preamps and NO to the Mc DACs IMHO.  No sure that the DAC built inside the analog preamp is a good idea.  My two cents based on my experiences, YMMV.  I have also used MC275 and MC30s with C42 and experienced excellent sound from both setups.  SS Mc preamps sound great with MC tube amps IMO.  Good luck! 

Not counting the DAC, I would be suprised if the McIntosh would really outperform your VTL. Depending on your taste in gear, though, it may.

If you decide to sell your 2.5, let me know. 

Why would you be surprised?  Is this comment based on your experience with different McIntosh preamps mb1audio? 

" Why would you be surprised? Is this comment based on your experience with different McIntosh preamps mb1audio?"

Yes. The 2.5 doesn't sound anything like a McIntosh preamp, tube or SS. Many consider the VTL to be one of the most underrated preamps in audio. For the most part, I would agree. Also, keep in mind that the 2.5 has a relatively simple appearance, where McIntosh is just the opposite. That will account for at least some of the price difference between the 2. The Mac will have more features that may, or may not, get used that don't necessarily have an effect on SQ. 

So a preamps appearance has an effect on it's price?  Maybe, but this should not be significant.  Mc preamps have given the end user control over the room or the recording that certainly have an effect on sound quality in my listening space.  I'm gonna have to agree that the VTL 2.5 doesn't sound anything like a McIntosh.  Like I said before, I tried to make the 2.5 sound like music here in my system, but was unsuccessful.  I used highest quality vintage tubes and quality cabling as well.  This preamp might be good for you, but in my experience most if not all of the McIntosh preamps I have used (tube and SS)have reproduced music convincingly better here.  The C42, which is an older SS Mc preamp, made the VTL 2.5 sound overly analytical, lacking in musicality, and less refined in my system.  It has a "bite" to it I just can't  live with, as always YMMV.

Over a year ago I snagged a C50/MC452 combo and have been loving life, driving a pair of Focal Sopra No2 floor-standing speakers.
I do not use the built in DAC, so I can't comment on how good that sounds, but have a PS Audio DirectStream DAC into the balanced input on the C50.  I thought that DACs were improving so rapidly, not to be tied down to the internal DAC.
One thing I really like about the C50 are the number of balanced outputs (3 sets), I use one set to connect my power amp, one set to connect a pair of JL Audio sub woofers and the third set to connect a Bryston headphone amplifier (the C50's headphone amp struggles to power my inefficient but excellent Sennheiser HD800's).
I was also attracted to the eight-band equalizer, but once I got things "tuned" in my "man cave", bypass the tone controls.
I'm really happy with my setup, including the C50.

Hi

I own the Macintosh D100 , Is the inner DAC in the D100 is the same as the C50 ? Better ? Worst?