With the exception of some of there tube gear, not many really use this stuff(or admit to it anyway), I am mainly referring to there amps. They look pleasant, they look good on paper and have the price of high end gear, but I seldom hear anyone claiming to like or one day dreaming of owning McIntosh. I have never really listened to there stuff, no good word of mouth sort of scares me away from it, the only people who like it are those who sell it, an uncanny coincidence? I don’t know. Sorry it this has been covered many times in the past, I ran a search and could not find anything.
Frepec - I agree with you. There are some people who like to stir up controversy just to see the response. I have owned some gear by varios manufacturers through the years including McIntosh, Audio Research, Conrad-Johnson, Bryston, Cary, Manley, McCormack, etc. Having rotated through various gear, I would take the Mac equipment back any day. It is warm sounding, extremely reliable, pleasant to look at, and holds its value. As you said, there are alot of sheep out there just following the rest of flock, too clueless to form their own opinions.
To be upfront, I am a Mac enthusiast. I have been for a long time now. Currently, I am using a 2102 tube power amp with a 2200 tube preamp. These two pieces give me liquid sound with plenty of base. I also get wide sound staging great image focus. But what really gets me going is the sound this equipment produces is just what I want. Over the past 40 years I have had other brands of equipment, but I always seem to come back to Mac.
I am a frequent visitor to Audiogon and have been on site enough to have heard all the cleches and worn out stereotype phrases made by Audiogon patrons about Mac gear. Frankly, I think that most of the naysayers don't know what they are talking about. Everyone has an opinion about audio gear, but I haven't heard any of the anti-Mac people use reasons others than the same old, same old. Makes you wonder. I too, have noticed that Mac gear rarely shows up here for sale. I read about the trade-up program in a previous response and would agree (although I have never heard of it) that maybe that has some effect on the scarcity of used equipment on Audiogon. But, I don't think that is the only reason. It could just be that Mac equipment is well built and doesn't wear out (My 2102 is almost 10 years old. Never needed anything but tubes. I have a MC150 solid state amp that is 15 years old and hasn't needed anything but light bulbs). It could also mean that Mac customers are totally in love with their equipment and don't want to change. I also noticed that when Mac equipment comes available on Audiogon, it doesn't stay available for long. That in itself says a lot about Mac gear.
Like I said above, everyone has an opinion about audio gear. It just amazes how many sheep out there spout the same stuff over and over again. Where are the original free thinkers?
I heard various Hanson speakers powered by the latest McIntosh gear about a year ago or so. The systems sounded horrible. I attributed it to the Hansons since I had never heard the speakers. Someone else who heard the same demo and heard the speakers elsewhere agreed that the electronics were to blame for the poor sound. I was shocked, as I thought would be a great combo.
If you can get past the big vu meters, build quality thats over the top, a company that has making gear forever, and represents a status symbol that you have finally arrived, you could actually settle on something else less attractive. However as good as it is there could be something better depending on your personal tastes and what your trying to match it with.
Well, I think that Audio Enthusiasts do indeed use McIntosh. McIntosh has it's unique sound just like (not that same as) Audio Research and others. Many really like the Mac sound. I have heard some wonderful sounding McIntosh equipment. As always, equipment interaction and speakers make a big difference. I have heard great McIntosh equipment through exceptionally bright speakers and it drove me out of the room. However, it wasn't the McIntosh electronics that was the problem. But, to elaborate, I have heard top of the line Krell equipment that was wayyyy too bright for me. Swapped the equipment with some other high end equipment through the same speakers and wow! great sound. So, in my experience, Krell is still too bright for my taste, but for some other people, they love the Krell sound. To each their own. McIntosh makes some really good/great equipment. But, as with any other manufactures, it has it's own "sound".
Talk2me - My only piece of Mc gear is the MCD500, which I have found to be musically quite impressive at its price point. Since you no longer have your MCD500, did you replace it with another CDP? If so, may I ask what replaced your MCD500 and what you prefer about it over the MCD500?
In my 30 years as a 'recorded music' fan, I have not heard anything as stunning as Burmester electronics, a company started by a musician/engineer. Burmester has all the virtues of tubes, with the quickness of ss. I had a McIntosh MCD500 for a year, and was quite impressed with it. Their amps are decent also. But, their preamps do nothing for me-no magic or emotion. For me, music is about passion and emotion, and Mc gear does not do it. However, I am old enough to know that it does not mean Mc gear is not good stuff because I did not connect with it
I think many people like to crap on Mcintosh because it is a larger company owned by a conglomerate not necessarily because they have ever heard the equipment setup correctly. Mcintosh has a history and heritage and is a business adn to some that defies the idea it could be a real high end company.
MC is also still standout expensive in an industry of generally expensive products. I currently own Mcintosh equipment as well as stuff from CJ, SAE, ATI,Portage, Harman Kardon, YS Audio, Creek, Cambridge Audio, and others. I just bought some "new" vintage MC equipment I am having refurbished by Terry DeWick. I like the MC sound but prefer the older SS or tubes to todays stuff....maybe because I can afford more of it. I do, however, see where it is different depending on the music I listen to, the source I use, the speakers its played thru etc. Generally I feel MC is a little less detailed on the highe end but makes the mid-range just right, real, warm and like music. I started with MC 35+ years ago and have left and come back more than once. I found over time that most others SS sounded etched on the high end even though it was seen as "detailed". I found I could not listen as long or as intently as ot the MC. AND, I have never even owned MC tubes and dont consider myself an audiophile but rather just a music lover who occasionally has extra money to try to make his experience better! I have it in mind next that tubes will be something I have to get deep into as I heard a wonderful MC tube amp setup and system at Overture Audio 2 years ago that bests all the rest of my audio "memories". I think it might be my "last system". To each his own I think is the real answer....if you like it buy it. You should at least listen with open, objective ears.
Silly statement indeed. I think people would agree that for the most part people on this site are audiophiles or at least take pride in their equipment. Plug Mcintosh into the systems search page and you will find about 400 people who use Mac gear in their systems...
There are alot of audio enthusiast that own McIntosh, but there are also alot of McIntosh owners who have never heard of Amperex or Teles (not casters)- in other words a brand of good equipment that might be owned by many who have never read TAS or heard of Audiogon - different then let's say folks that own DeHaviland SETs for example. Mac sells alot of gear to alot of types of folks, some are not audiophiles mor do they want to be, but they have some money and they want some "good" stuff and they trust the brand of their fathers. Regradless, excellent gear at the beginning, and again today (there was a dark ages IMHO).
Boy this is really a silly post..so I guess I'll throw in my 2cents too.... Some musicians use Fender Strats & Tele's (not telefunken for those not in the know), some Gibson Les Pauls or 335's. Marshall amps vs. fender amps!!Who CARES!! Listen to what you like ,buy what you like, we don't have to justify anything to anyone!! Sheeshhh!!!
My personal experience has been consistent with some of the other posters - Mac gear sounds pretty good but seems a bit slow, bloated and not very resolving.
Two of my friends have solid state Mac gear. One with more recent Mac pre/power amps with B&W Nautilus speakers, and the other with Mac pre/power amps with JBL studio speakers from some years back. Over the past few years, I've listened to their systems and was never really that impressed. They have also come to listen to my system at various times - my system has changed over the years but the preamp was either a Sonic Frontiers or Jeff Rowland, while the power amp was either a Threshold SA's or Pass Labs Aleph's with B&W Matrix speakers.
What was interesting is that they consistently notice the imaging, detail, and spaciousness of the sound with the SF/Jeff Rowland and Threshold/Pass Labs. Granted the speakers, room, and setup play a major part in this, but it is interesting that they identify this sonic difference in character. And I certainly agreed with their assessment.
Not saying which sound is better or worse but to each his/her own - whether Mac or not.
I recently auditioned and bought a pair of MC501's driving Martin Logan CLX's via an MBL 6010D. I was and am blown away by the Mcintosh sound. I am listening to the music, live or studio, and no longer listening to the audio equipment. For so long I viewed this brand as anachronistic and appealing to those that did not know Hi-Fi. I am wrong. The Mcintosh product is state of the art, soundwise, design wise and looks-wise. A real manual is provided (not a garage company) and the packaging is as it should be for expensive gear. This is a company that knows its business and is very customer driven.
Time for a few audiophiles to stop "listening with their eyes" and audio review mentality and listen to the music with their ears!
Really, McIntosh has become some what of an installer brand sold at licensed low voltage and home automation dealers. Right next to alarms and vacuume cleaners. I don't know what this does to the brands image, but surely allot of gear is falling into the hands of people with more money than knowledge of either audio gear or music. They have never heard of Mac nor a Dorian mode. lolol They just want a home theater because they went to a dinner party at so n so's house that had a big home theater and now they are down at the home theater store getting a one-on-one meeting with a consultant to talk over thier needs.
It's also being sold at some fairly big box stores, but I guess you need to sell somewhere. You can't fault a company for trying to sell a product and with all the smaller stores crashing, one needs to go somewhere so maybe this is not bad in and off itself.
Also, Mac car audio gear can't really help in the eyes of true audiophiles. What's next, an alarm clock radio?
Really, the many times I have heard Mac, it was okay, but did not reach out and grab me in any way. I could take it or leave it. Nothing to die for. I think the autoformers that make the amps weigh a ton is what probably gives people the impression of over the top build- their noting but dead weight, why does no other SS amp use output transformers?
A Mac MA6800 just rescued my B&W 805s from the brink of being sold. I have had a lower budget system of Yamaha NS-1000Xs and an old Luxman L-507 amp that I've been extremely proud of for many years. It sounds much better than many very expensive systems I've heard.
Last year I added B&W 805s to make it 4-channels, mainly because of my poor hearing on one side (While it loses imaging, 4 channels means if I turn my head it all still sounds good, whereas with 2 channels I'll only hear one speaker). The system has a nice synergy, with the B&Ws adding smoother highs to make-up for the Yamahas weaker point of the tweeters. For the past year, however, I've wanted to replace the B&Ws with something offering more punch and bigger, tighter bass.
To make a long (and on-going) story short, I suddenly on a whim splurged and bought Sonus Faber Guarneri Homages. They look SO NICE. Unfortunately, they sounded AWFUL run by my old Luxman L-507, a 50-60 Wpc SS amp from 1973. Urgent to give the Guarneris a fairer shot at impressing me, I read about and found quite a few people recommended them with the McIntosh MA6900. As the MA6800 cost just a bit over half of the 6900, but still provides 150 W/channel, I brought an MA6800 home to try with the Guarneris.
This told me a little more, but not everything, about the potential of the Guarneris, but in the process, it did something unexpected. On the suggestion of a visiting British audiophile friend, I happened plug my B&Ws in to the McIntosh with some really good jazz recordings, and GEEEZE! What a match!
Those B&Ws won't be leaving my house at any time soon now, nor will the MA6800.
I've a 47 y/o mc240 live in a share house with 2 others theres always someone dropping around and music is always going flat out.
Most of them have your average $1000/$2500 audio equipment and think they know a good sound. Until they hear the 47 y/o mcintosh,comments like I can't believe its only a 40 watt amp Its so detailed are common. Sh!t I've lost count of how many people have been blown away by it. As for reliability its only ever had the caps replaced. Its very easy on tubes runs cool. I own a Markhill 6L6 A 2 y/o runs very hot, eats tubes up like there gone out of fashion.(pun intended) .Its a nice sound for what it is but it hasn't got a patch on the mac.
A buddy of mine runs a pair of gigantic Bozak Concert Grands with four MC-30s and a couple of different Mac preamps, as well as a Mac CD changer (not sure of the model numbers). He also owns a bunch of other Mac stuff, including two MC-275s and who knows what else, but they're collector's pieces and not normally in use.
As weird as this combination sounds on paper, it actually sounds wonderful. Amazing bottom end coherence and consistency throughout the entire tonal range (I'm sorry, but there's nothing like the sound of eight 12" woofers); I always leave his place feeling jealous.
I believe people who categorically slam McIntosh gear either haven't heard it set up properly or are just ignorant.
I am considering taking the plunge and try out a Tube amplifier in my system. I have a McIntosh MC402 amplifier, C2200 preamp, MCD201 CD player, and Legacy Audio Focus 20/20 speakers. I am considering Bi-amping. Using a tube amplifier to drive the mids and the highs in the speakers, and the MC 402 to drive the woofers. My questions are: How do I go about selecting a tube amp that would match the MC 402 for the Bi-amp application? Shouldn't I be concerned about matching the gain and input sensitivity of both amplifiers? The MC 402 has a input sensitivity of 2V (Unbalanced) and 4V (balanced), but I am not sure what the gain is because the MC 402 specification has several listings for db, but did not specify the output gain in db. I am considering the following tube amps: MC 2102, a Cary CAD 120S, and an Audio Space NOVA 88 mono block. Does anyone have a Bi-Amp configuration in their system, or Does anyone have some guidance for me, especially on the input sensitivity and the gain for the amps?
when you say the roland sounded too calm and collected, what do you mean ? i have auditioned many roland amps and pres, but not in my own stereo system. i have also heard older roland gear with avalon speakers in nyc at an audio dealer. i wouldn't characterize the sound of roland as calm and collected.
also, are you suggesting the roland sounds more like an old tube sound and the mac more like a modern, non-tubey presentation ?
also the question about mac and audio enthusiasts perhaps should focus on the strengths and weaknesses of mcintosh amps, preamps and digital sources.
I recently "upgraded" from a Jeff Rowland Concerto integrated (which was no slouch) to a McIntosh MA2275 'toob' integrated. It was a huge risk on my part because the San Diego Mac dealers don't really lend out gear and most consumers in San Diego don't purchase enough esoteric two-channel stuff anymore to warrant a dealer actually stocking an integrated -- let alone one that costs nearly six-and-a-half-large.
Unpacking a McIntosh piece can be called a revelatory experience; One immediately notices that real people actually gave a sh_t and packed the unit to withstand the UPS Drop-Kick Delivery Technique. And Mac is smart enough to NOT plaster "fragile" stickers all over the package because they serve as "crush me!" beacons to couriers. The packing itself weighs over 30 pounds! After removing two layers of very thick cardboard packaging and foam, the finale comes when the family members argue over how to properly unbolt (!) the MA2275 from its wooden pallet without destroying it. Finally we decided to flip the amp on its side atop a pillow and then began to unbolt the four large metal bolts and washers from the pallet. The MA2275 seemed to breathe a sigh of relief as it was liberated from its packing constraints.
I almost ruined my lower vertebrae while lifting it (properly I might add) onto its perch atop a Salamander rack. The "pound-per-watt" rule was true in this case.
I could almost sense the Rowland taunting the Mac as I started the process of gingerly inserting the four KT-88 (Russian) power tubes and six 12AX7A (Russian) preamp tubes into the gleaming top of the Mac. After replacing the tube cover and hooking up all the cabling it was time for a listen. But first...
It seems that the folk at McIntosh value the tactile -- almost retro -- feel of the control surfaces of its products. When I rotate the Source select knob or adjust the volume I get a reassuring feeling that something within that glowing front fascia (made of cool retro glass and illuminated by high-tech LEDs) is working. And then there's those meters. Those cool blue meters ;-) -- Remember when manufacturers began to put blue LEDs on their gear? One brand had their blue LEDs so bright as to burn one's eyeballs out. Ugh. Or when Muse's bright red LEDs seared holes in reviewers' retinas? Some manufacturers are still guilty of that today. But not McIntosh. And definitely not those giant blue meters. For these meters genuinely serve a purpose; to let me know that 75+ pure tube watts are making their way to a waiting pair of Avalon Opus speakers sitting at the end of 30' of Analysis Plus cable.
People warned me that 75 watts would not be enough to drive the Avalons. (This is why I went to the Rowland's 250 Class-D watts in the first place). I am happy to report that in the case of my system and 3700 cubic-foot room, those folks are wrong. Complex orchestral passages played at 100+dB never sounded gelled nor fuzzy. In fact my ears gave out well before the cool blue meters started pegging the '150 peak watt' mark. And during times when I was able to endure the large SPL's the MA2275 was indeed clipping and, as tubes do, gently transition into even-order distortion.
The typical audiophile terms? Yes. In spades. Slam. Check. Rhythm. Check. Deep soundstage. Check. Smooth, detailed midrange. Check. 'Sounds Live From Other Room' test. Check.
I can understand that for those with larger rooms and/or inefficient speakers, the MA2275 may not be the answer. If you have Kats and Kids, it's almost definitely not the answer. There are a few times when the Rowland seemed to have an easier go at the music. But in my system, the Rowland sounded too calm and collected. It just wanted me to HEAR the music. The Mac, on the other hand, sounded more true -- more real. It WANTED me to LISTEN to the music. And in the end, the Mac's magical sonic qualities outweighed the effortless slam of the Rowland.
And to many people, therein lies the magic of McIntosh.
Best Regards from a recent Mac Convert/Audio Enthusiast ;-)
Happy consumers can be a simple general way to also refer to a happy audio enthusiast. To me they are very different, so I am not sure what point of the question is.. But to get more granular, an audio enthusiast is different because it is usually person who loves music first, and is passionate about equipment second. What that hifi equipment is can be a completely different discussion altogether. Hi-Fi is really it's own very obscure category..I have lots of friends who think the pursuit of hi end audio is silly, and I can understand why they think that, they would be categorized as a satisfied consumer. On the other hand, I can't fathom listening to music any other way than through hi end equipment; Bose, and Marantz and Denon, and Sony, etc to me are not hi-fi, they live in a completely different category, where happy/satisfied consumers live as well.
Audio enthusiast is someone who cares about detail in sound, and details build quality of equipment-and the fun associated with it..To me hi end audio is a small shop operation, not operated by a conglomerate in an effort to stay viable, often times hifi manufacturers are just a few equally passionate people who have the ability and have chosen to make hi end audio equipment (thank you for them!). Because they too love music like most of us here on the forums, and these are the people that understand that things CAN be better than commercial, mass market equipment.
I mean does the guy who owns Bose equipment know why a Black Gate Capacitor is better than what they use in Bose? Or how important circuit board design and layout is? Or Power supply-doubtfully. That doesn't mean he is stupid, just not interested. Does a guy who owns Sony CD player know that DAC inside is what makes a CD sound better or worse-doubtfully....I will say one thing, the guy listening to the commercial mass market equipment has one major advantage usually, not overpaying for this stuff they way we ALL do, and they still get the benefit of hearing music. Without the magic of course. : )
since mcintosh is a viable company, some consumers are buying their products. of those who boight their products, some are pleased with their purchase. what term would one use to characterize satisfied purchasers ? if not audio enthusiasts, how do you define the term ? if the "happy" customers are not audio enthusiasts what are they ?
Nrchy: AMEN BROTHER. I owned a Krell FPB 200 for about 4 and half years. Yes it had tremendous bass sock, but I always found it to be a bit hard sounding. Not awful, but it was there. I finally got back on the upgrade bandwagon again as audiophiles will. I went to an Edge M8M, then to a Luminous Audio KST-150 (big, big mistake) and then finally to a MAC 402 and the search was over. My wife (bless her heart) said when she heard the MAC "Honey, this is a different ballgame". She said it was the best sounding amp that I have ever owned. Have a good laugh fellow audiogoners. Just giving my opinion FWIW. Love all you guys and I read the forums everyday and really get a kick out of them.
Then Justin Timberlake, Ludacris, Christina Aguilera, Pink, R.Kelly etc. must be good music because people buy there albums. McDoalds must make good food because tons of people buy their food. Bud Light must be good beer because lots of people drink it. "Dude Where's My Car" must be good cinema becasue lots of people watched it. Etc.
I haven't thought much of MacIntosh since the 70's when it was good stuff. Recently a friend bought a Mac pre-amp, and then traded his Parasound JC-1 for Mac monos... Wow what a huge improvement over the JC-1!
I didn't expect much but the new stuff really sounded good. People who have written mac off should reconsider.
Jamnesta, awesome point, and it would be incredibly useful here if we could organize a Sound debate.
Bossjay, did you just say Bose sounds good? I need you to explain to me why then the $300 set of computer speakers I bought two months ago are now blown. Bose is incredibly engineered sound, and it is NOT good. Some may in fact like it, and think it is believable, and in certain applications it is sufficient, but it does not really sound good....To me anyway.
I am by no means a snob, but I am a purist, and to me out of all the amps I have listened to thus far, Krell hits all the marks I look for. For others Mac might do that, and (although painful for me to say) Bose may too.
Mac is that good and Bose is that good. Look at it this way if it werent that good people wouldnt buy it. All this crap is good or it wouldnt still be selling for this long. Buy what you like and dont listen to these nuts. smile
Wouldn't it be interesting to get the 2 camps together in one place to demo/debate what each is hearing/looking for? Of course liability policies would have to be up to date and all furniture removed. I wonder if the experience would be convergent or further polarize?
Alaric, I like your description "blue eye"..Funny stuff.
It's true though, opinions are all unique, or you know what they say, they are like a-holes, we all have em and they stink!
Anyway, not meaning to brand bash, just state my experience, if it came across as brand bashing my bad. Who knows, I could get this FPB in my room and think it sound terrible. Doubtful, but possible, and I would be honest either way, Krell or not. If it doesn't sound good, I don't see the spending the kind of money we spend on this stuff, cause in the end albeit cliche, it is TRULY all about the emotion of music, not just the delivery of it.
Although I can't afford any Mac gear I've demoed a bunch at my local "dream store". Also known a few people who own and swear by the stuff. It seems that ever increasing "detail" in audio gear has tended towards a brighter sound. While all that detail is impressive at first , it just gets annoying to me after a few hours. McIntosh gear seems to have a more soothing , relaxed sound that you can leave on all day and not think about anything but the music. After a couple divorces I'm down to a little integrated (Marantz PM7200) that has the same type sound-with the obvious caveat that it ain't Mac. I like the signature "Mac sound" and would use their amps in a heartbeat if I could afford it. Finally , I've noticed that Mac amps definitely have speaker preferences. They don't seem to like many planar or ribbon speakers. Hook a pair of Mac monoblocks to a pair of Klipschorns or LaScalas though , and you'll hear why the old guys love their "blue eyes".
Jc - it looks like your trolling now - I say to each his own it's your money but if you've been a member very long you know some advice and opinions are helpful and others are crap. Usually when descriptives are on the extreme side, well that sometimes points to exaggeration. I think that's what gets people's dander up because sometimes it's exactly opposite to what they hear. You went to the trouble to lug a 100lb amp home to audition, it didn't work for you - it is what it is. Good thing you didn't buy first!
Some hobbiest enjoy brand bashing, goodness knows Krell and MIT have to be the all time favorites on this site, not saying your bashing Mcintosh like I said some of your descriptions were on the extreme side. I personally have never heard a Krell that worked for me or B&W but tastes change, mine might as well. To each his own....it's your money!
Hello, no offense taken, but I have sold over 3,000 cars and drove and serviced them all, the reason my ferrari analogy was, well Ferrari is a very misunderstood car by most people, they think they are "tempermental',"expensive to repair and mucho high maintenance....nothing is further from the truth...Ferraris are extremely well built and well engineered....and serviced at the proper intervals are very easy to live with.....the whole point of a sports car is tohave fun driving it....i.e. does it put a smile on your face...to me Ferrari does it every time....same with Mac....hence my analogy. Just because a manufacturer is big or small has no merit with me....it is their product and value in the marketplace that counts....and Mac being in the home audio business for so long one might say they have it down......meaning they can build a hi end amp more efficiently than the competition, thus bringing to market an amp that a lesser company simply can't do...as in the MC 275...tough to beat at that price.....anyway an interesting point, of ALL the cars that I have sold and serviced....the 5 Ferraris needed just about the least amount of attention...who knew.
Hi Jc51373, Yes we all have opinions and we all hear differently. Krell is your amp of choice and McIntosh happens to be mine. Most systems differ in components not to mention room treatments. System synergy is what we're all looking for in this wacky hobby. I think what has most McIntosh owners scratching their heads is your description of this amp as "Dry and etched"............"unemotional and uninvoling" are a bit more subjective and that is your honest opinion. This is close to 180 degrees opposite of my experience with this amplifier. Musical with a relaxed presentation, involving, emotional and just a smoth sweet sound would be my characterization of this McIntosh amp.
Vanilla & choclate........... we all have opinions
Hey guys, listen...Lets not get huffy, my opinions (albeit over the internet and not communicated completely) are not intended to try and upset anyone...They were formed through listening, and therefore I consider them fact-based opnions, first-hand opinions.
To me comparing these amps to a Ferrari is even more inaccurate. Ferrari's are nice don't get me wrong, but they are mainly eye-candy, unreliable, high-maintenance, not mass produced, and very expensive. I have also driven in them, and find them to be incredibly impractical too. Not to mention, Mac Amps, are practical, and are admittedly slower amps. I might compare Shindo, Goldmund, or Nagra to a Ferrari if I were going to make that analogy.
I do however like the Cadillac analogy much better than the Mercedes or Ferrari. I have listened, and I gave it a fair shake in different systems, and each time it was the same for me, unemotional, uninvolving, dry, etched. Doesn't mean that some may not prefer this sound, to each his own. I think it is important either way to be able to voice your opinion intelligently, and constructively, for the benefit of those searching these forums to evaluate. This is not bashing, and if you feel it is, so be it.
I personally love buying equipment, if possible, from smaller independently owned manufacturers. They are usually more passionate about what they do, which typically results in a better product. Although Levinson might be the exception, their stuff sounds great, but service has suffered since HSG took the helm. MnIntosh is owned by who? Denon? Marantz? I would however have less of a problem with that if the stuff sounded as good as Krell or ML, but it doesn't and too often it is compared to it, which is not accurate. Collectively, these things are to be considered when looking at McIntosh.
"03-19-07: Jc51373 Trying to make a McIntosh analogous to a Mercedes is actually an excellent way to describe what I think of McIntosh, if you need to know. It's an over-priced status symbol, ruined by a conglomerate. I have now heard the McIntosh in three separate systems, including my own, and in all of them I got the same feeling from it."
No, I disagree. McIntosh is more like Cadillac. Mercedes automobiles are worth every penny, but Cadillac? Hardly!
WOW! Jc51373 and Uraniumcommittee I can agree with you in one area and that it is your opinion and that's what makes the world go around but obviously neither one of you have heard the product in a system that is great sounding, too bad for the both of you. You both would likely get along really well.
This is a hobby and there is nothing perfect out there no matter how much it costs, that's life but you both should know that. You should make it a practise not to bash other gear, if you don't like it find but leave it at that because when you start making absorb statements that make no sense it only takes away from your credibility.
Hey everyone has an opinion...so here is mine...being in the car business for the last 15 yrs and having sold and driven everything from A to Z..I mean just about every brand,from Kia,Daewoo to Ferrari,Lotus and Porsche etc....I personally wouldn't compare Mac to Cadillac or Mercedes....my comparison is to Ferrari...and here's why.
I have driven and sold 5 Ferraris (different models) and they all have that certain "something" that makes you want to get in and drive,even go out of your way to get somewhere.....they are not the fastest,or quickest and probably not the overall best handling....but when Ferrari puts a car together...it is "all there" and just sooooo right. To me Mac is on the same plane...maybe not most detailed,or "best bass" etc.....but listening to music thru my mac gear,makes me want to listen to...well more music.....and to me that is what it is all about.
Yes I like the looks and build quality, but the sound is most important,and I have other gear which I also like
Trying to make a McIntosh analogous to a Mercedes is actually an excellent way to describe what I think of McIntosh, if you need to know. It's an over-priced status symbol, ruined by a conglomerate. I have now heard the McIntosh in three separate systems, including my own, and in all of them I got the same feeling from it.
I am entitled to my opinion of Mac, and you can flame all you want..I personally would care less if someone didn't like a Krell amp, or a piece I owned. If it works for you, all the power to you, I just think it is not the best value. I do however think it is a little comical how people who own Mac get so defensive of the stuff.
Certain brands have acquired 'cult' status. To me, McIntosh is kind of like Cadillac, a brand that for decades was considered to be in the luxury class, but not high performance. I still think it is largely true. There are certainly better-performing product lines out there, but McIntosh still sells because it has been around longer and it certainly is well-built. I would prefer Mark Levinson electronics by a large margin.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
