Question about input impedance and input sensitivity.

What would be the optimum input impedance and input sensitivity for an amp if it is to be driven by my a MX110?

Will my MX110 not be able to drive some amps?

Regards,
Chuck
 
Will my McIntosh MX110 be able to drive a MC2120 with an input impedance of 100k and input sensitivity of 0.75v or 2.5v.

How would this differ from driving my MC2105 that I have with an input impedance of 200k and an input sensitivity is 0.5v?

Thank you.
 
Merged threads. 2 people posting the same question at the same time, what are the odds of that.

The MX110 and MC2120 should work great together. The basic rule is you want the amp's input impedance to be at least 10 times the preamp's output impedance.

Does anyone know the output impedance of the MX110?
 
Does anyone know the output impedance of the MX110?

What should the input sensitivity on the MC2120 set to 0.75v or 2.5v for the MX110?
 
I am sure Mcintosh would not have designed a pre and an amplifier which would not pair up well with each other.
 
I did some web searches and could not find the MX110 output impedance. But I have never heard of any preamp having an output impedance greater that 10K ohms.

Remember the 10:1 ratio rule. Since the MC2120 has an input impedance of 100K ohms, any preamp with an output impedance of 10K ohms or lower will work fine with it. This should include almost every preamp ever made, including the MX110. I would guess the MX110 has an output impedance of about 1K ohms which would give you a 100:1 ratio.
 
So, I checked the MX-110 Z-series service manual and there is no spec for output impedance called out. From looking at the schematic of the 6U8 circuitry, its not going to be easy to figure it out, either.

Here's my take and, perhaps, someone else can confirm or 'put me in my place' about it:

The final output stage, 1/2 of the 6U8, is configured as a cathode follower with about 22K used for the cathode resistor, which in normal circumstances, would could be used to approximate the output impedance of that stage. The problem here is that both the bass/treble tone circuit is included in the feedback network as is a feedback loop to the other 1/2 of the same 6U8. For the result of this, I'll assume these have no effect on the output impedance but that's just a cheap way of not doing a detailed analysis ;-).

Next, the last stage of amplification then drives the Balance and Volume controls before the audio is presented to the RCA jacks for Output. Since we have a 60K Balance control and a 40K Volume control wire in parallel, they are presenting their load to the ~22K output impedance of the final cathode follower stage. This effectively puts them in parallel to the 22K. So, doing the math for 3 resistors wired in parallel, we have a result that _should_ come in lower than the typical 10K output impedance. Right?

I'm too tired right now to try to do the math.....someone else can......

Cheers,

David - off to bed.....
 
Last edited:
.....McIntosh Moderator Victor, wouldn't AudioClassics ship an MC2120 double-boxed?.....

Last month, Audio classic shipped my 1965 McIntosh tube tuner in a custom made, heavy duty box. This was packed in another box and surrounded with corrugated shock absorbers.
 
I did some web searches and could not find the MX110 output impedance. But I have never heard of any preamp having an output impedance greater that 10K ohms.

Remember the 10:1 ratio rule. Since the MC2120 has an input impedance of 100K ohms, any preamp with an output impedance of 10K ohms or lower will work fine with it. This should include almost every preamp ever made, including the MX110. I would guess the MX110 has an output impedance of about 1K ohms which would give you a 100:1 ratio.

So, I checked the MX-110 Z-series service manual and there is no spec for output impedance called out. From looking at the schematic of the 6U8 circuitry, its not going to be easy to figure it out, either.

Here's my take and, perhaps, someone else can confirm or 'put me in my place' about it:

The final output stage, 1/2 of the 6U8, is configured as a cathode follower with about 22K used for the cathode resistor, which in normal circumstances, would could be used to approximate the output impedance of that stage. The problem here is that both the bass/treble tone circuit is included in the feedback network as is a feedback loop to the other 1/2 of the same 6U8. For the result of this, I'll assume these have no effect on the output impedance but that's just a cheap way of not doing a detailed analysis ;-).

Next, the last stage of amplification then drives the Balance and Volume controls before the audio is presented to the RCA jacks for Output. Since we have a 60K Balance control and a 40K Volume control wire in parallel, they are presenting their load to the ~22K output impedance of the final cathode follower stage. This effectively puts them in parallel to the 22K. So, doing the math for 3 resistors wired in parallel, we a result that _should_ come in lower than the typical 10K output impedance. Right?

I realize this thread is almost a decade old, but this info is the most detailed analysis of the MX110's output impedance I've seen anywhere!

I have an MX110 and am curious if it can achieve the desired 10:1 ratio when driving a modern day MC275 VI (which has an input impedance of 47K).

Victor concludes "about 1K ohms"

dshoaf concludes "should come in lower than the typical 10K output impedance"

So if the MX110 output impedance is roughly 1K, is it correct that the the 10:1 ratio would be achieved with even the newer VI MC275 with it's 47K input impedance?

Has the correct value of the MX110 output impedance ever been definitively ascertained?
 
I realize this thread is almost a decade old, but this info is the most detailed analysis of the MX110's output impedance I've seen anywhere!

I have an MX110 and am curious if it can achieve the desired 10:1 ratio when driving a modern day MC275 VI (which has an input impedance of 47K).

Victor concludes "about 1K ohms"

dshoaf concludes "should come in lower than the typical 10K output impedance"

So if the MX110 output impedance is roughly 1K, is it correct that the the 10:1 ratio would be achieved with even the newer VI MC275 with it's 47K input impedance?

Has the correct value of the MX110 output impedance ever been definitively ascertained?

A design flaw (or cheap out) of the MX110 output stage is that the balance and volume control pots are unbuffered. Mac partially compensated for this by using unusually low values for the pots but....... Two interrelated consequences of this are that the output impedance will vary with the positions of the volume and balance controls AND so will HF rolloff to some extent. My quick, back-of-the envelope calculation with balance and vol at 12:00 results in ~ 10-12K ohm, more-or-less verifying dshoaf’s calculation of eons ago. IOW, 10K is consistent with Mac’s recommendation of loads >= 100K if the 10:1 rule of thumb is followed. No way is it 1K except when the vol pot is near minimum.

Maybe as a form of closure to this thread, I’ll measure the output impedance of my restored MX110. It may take a while since I’ve got another project on the bench at the moment. Stay tuned.
 
Wow, a real zombie thread of 6 years!

If I recall, all I did was a back-of-the-napkin sort of circuit analysis so if someone has circuit analysis software or, better yet, the set up jig to test output impedance out right, I'll be interested in how well my calculations were.

Cheers,

David
 
A few thoughts....

A lot of this "concern" about impedence is way overblown to the point of hyperbole.

A whole audio cottage industry was formed to " solve" the output impedence problems of the most popular budget tube preamp, the Dynaco PAS2 and 3.

I believe two or three TOL, SOA companies got their start selling updated/modified PAS preamps with buffered output circuits......and solutions are still offered to this day.

The anomalies were typically frequency response issues of less than 3 dB at frequency extremes beyond almost all speaker design capabilities, let alone human hearing.....and being a complex impedence you must always consider LCR and frequency.

The MX110 was Mac's budget preamp......the C20 and 22 did use buffered outputs.
 
A few thoughts....

A lot of this "concern" about impedence is way overblown to the point of hyperbole.

A whole audio cottage industry was formed to " solve" the output impedence problems of the most popular budget tube preamp, the Dynaco PAS2 and 3.

I believe two or three TOL, SOA companies got their start selling updated/modified PAS preamps with buffered output circuits......and solutions are still offered to this day.

The anomalies were typically frequency response issues of less than 3 dB at frequency extremes beyond almost all speaker design capabilities, let alone human hearing.....and being a complex impedence you must always consider LCR and frequency.

The MX110 was Mac's budget preamp......the C20 and 22 did use buffered outputs.
Hi Chris. Slightly off topic, but did the Dyna PAS3-X address these issues? (I own a 3X and always wondered the difference to the "3 non X").
 
Hi Chris. Slightly off topic, but did the Dyna PAS3-X address these issues? (I own a 3X and always wondered the difference to the "3 non X").

The PAS3/X did nothing to “resolve” output impedance issues. The main difference between the 3 and 3X is that the X incorporated special tone control pots designed to remove the tone control circuits from the signal path when in the 12:00 position as opposed to the more typical “nominally flat” response.
 
Back
Top Bottom