Why do no audio enthusiasts use McIntosh?

Recently, I stopped in to listen to the McIntosh MA2275 Integrated at a local dealer. It was thrilling! Some forty years has passed since I last listened to tubes – a product of a home brewing friend of my father’s. In that instant, I knew what had been lost (at least, for me) over all those years to solid state “cleanliness” and digital “convenience”.

To be sure, this Mac incorporates elements of all three in its presentation, but its output is pure, warm analogue. At $6200, it comes in at five times what I can afford, but that McIntosh audition sure pointed the way for me in a quest for affordable tube audio. Mac is back – and back as a class act.

I had not seen this thread before and found it fascinating reading as I have owned a Mac in the past, MA6500, which being an entry-level integrated, may cause some to argue it is not a "real Mac".

Anyway, I did like its sound. I did like its looks. I had to sell because it was underpowered, which seemed funny given its 200 wpc rating, and I am now using a 100 wpc amp which performs better into high volumes.

But reading the above made me think about why I liked it... and that is that it was easy to listen to! I think they deliberately avoid audiophile characteristics so that much analysis is not done to the sound. Even mags like Sterophile say things like "it didn't seem to have much detail, but it wasn't missing any either" (not a direct quote, just from my memory of the 501 review). Huh? Either it has the detail or it doesn't, no? But then again those guys are masters of equivocation.

Back to Mac... I think the 'lazy' comment does have some validity. These are people pleased by other things, but what is wrong with that? They like the look. They like showing it off to their friends (it has to be admitted that they look impressive, and expensive. Guaranteed to impress the unwashed masses). I had a party at my place during the time I owned the 6500 and it was all "oohs" and "aahs", and I hadn't even turned on the damn thng yet! And not one of these people had ever heard one before, but had heard OF Mac.

So if I appear to have contradicted myself, so be it. I did 'like' the sound. I did not 'admire' the sound. Which is better? Horses for courses, as they say.

Mac makes a good living out of its image and its sound. Let's grant them their niche and admit they do the Bose thing very well, and btw were doing it before Bose was in diapers.

Oh, as to reliability, the 6500 I bought was a dealer demo. It was shipped to me with one bulb burned out, less than 1 year old.

As to the Mac lovers not frequenting this site, who the heck are all those people who posted "I love my Mac" or similar?

Many of today's audiophiles like the quick fix type components, or anything that is popular at the time. Well, McIntosh has really stood the test of time. They are "The Company" that started "Systems Engineering". Among other firsts, They also offered a high-end, fully remote controlled system, While other Companies were saying a remote System would jeopardize their systems integrity. While other Companies have gone thru several design changes (cosmetically, that is), McIntosh has retained the Blue meters, The Glass facecovers, and the All Black Chasis cover, and from what I heard at the CES show their Components will be awfully hard to beat.

Most "audiophiles" like to listen to the equipment, "does it have higher highs, more air, more this and that" me I get off listening to the music, and the equipment that plays it...musically...over the years I have heard LOTS of stuff....I own 5 pieces of Mac gear....they aren't leaving my house....quite frankly their gear nails it....musically.

Well put Ben...As I am new to Mcintosh with 501 mono's they continue to far exceed my expectations. I have about 100 hours on them, and they are the most natural sounding and organic amps I've heard.