Agm,
I agree with you! That table is ridiculous looking. |
A few weeks ago I was at a show. I listend to the 1.2 kw with the Focal Scala's. The control was not good. Also the speed and timing was not good as well. I talkes this week to someone who owned the 1.2 kw. He told me the same that the speed and control is not the best part of Mcintosh. That was the reason why he sold it. |
@ Audiozen, No I will not mention Taralabs,LOL! your post is on the money!Mcintosh, bose, done all that!, you should do what these people asked of you!, tell them what you have for equipment so they will understand your were you are comming from!, lol!, cheers! |
Donjr, Why worry about why some diss Mac? If you like it, enjoy it! Probably those in the "I want every last clinical detail wrung out of my equipment" or the "I want totally neutral sound (does that exist?)" won't like MacIntosh. Those who prefer the warmish, more romantic sound do. We all hear differently and have different priorities about the sound we prefer. Neither camp is correct, both preferences are valid. |
I think I heard a new Mc integrated amp recently that was perhaps CLass D/switching of some sort and seemed to have good speed and control accordingly. Audition was brief running of some newer larger and fairly pricey Totems that I had heard of other Mc amps prior.
Also saw the Mc turntable in question. YEs, that is quite different looking and unique, a good thing to help distinguish it from the pack. Did not get to hear it so I would withhold judgement accordingly. Speed meters does not seem like a bad idea to me if done well. Used to be that most all Japanese and European turntables had strobe devices of some sort on them to help identify any speed issue. Those were useful! Often, speed variations observed but perhaps hard to hear could be corrected easily by cleaning the belt and pulley mechanism. That was often needed for good results, even with new tables. You would think more modern and way more expensive tables would have some way built in to validate proper speed! What might they be hiding? |
I remember seeing the Mac TT at an open house that prominently featured Mac gear. When I asked to hear it, I was told it wasn't hooked up!!?? Talk about yr wtf moments! |
I think they are over priced for what they do, although they do sound good. I prefer Krell, and Teac AI-1000 (2000,3000) int. amp.
Who thought Teac would make such a good sounding gears, but hear them for your self - I heard them yesterday, and was blown away at the cost per quality ratio.
Anyone looking for an int. amp for under 1k might want to have a listen. The sales man said they have parts found in much more expensive gears.
They look classy as well.
|
It's interesting to note that those doing most of the "bashing" on Mac gear have never owned it, which disqualifies them from even making a judgment. All brands have their followers and haters of their products. Once you understand that NO brand of gear is going to replicate the real thing, then it's time to start listening to products that make the listening experience pleasurable to YOU. Some of the "reference gear", while being state of the art, may not be your cup of tea.
Personally, I like their gear for the most part, and I do own it. I will agree with some who have stated their cd player's reliability problems, and can speak to that too. I won't own another cd or universal player from them, as they never get the bugs worked out right. But their preamps and amps do really well, especially the newer ones. I've had other products whose sound always had me on edge, and I never listened to them for very long. But the so-called Mac sound is pleasing to my ears and I always have a pleasurable time in listening nowadays. And looking at the gear in a darkened room, well, I like that too.
Whatever Mac is doing, it must be pretty good, and their sales will attest to that. Some have commented on the fact that they have been owned by several offshore companies since Frank and Gordon passed on, but some have really helped Mac in providing needed funds to provide a better product. Being able to get advanced equipment in cutting the glass faceplates with water-cutting lasers has been one big improvement. I do think they are trying to be a "something for everyone" company lately, but all-in-all, they will be around when most other companies are just a memory of the past. |
Hi Roxy54,
To answer your question:
I used to sell a ton of equipment for a friend who owned a audio salon back in the '70's & '80's.
Most of the doctors & lawyers that I dealt with would choose McIntosh equipment (amp/s, pre & tuner) either a Thorens or a Garrard TT, a Tandberg cass or RTR & B&W speakers.
I would get them package quotes, deliver & install @ their homes & then explain in detail how everything worked (usually for 2 hours or so).
Then I would go home & wait for the phone to ring.
Hi Richard - This is Dr. so & so - My wife just came home & I wanted to show her our new stereo system - CAN YOU TELL ME HOW TO TURN IT ON?
FWIW - I made a small fortune back then on the percentage I would receive on discount, the sales tax, delivery & installation.
So to sum it up:
I have heard many McIntosh systems in my lifetime & they really do sound pretty good, but not as good as 95% of the systems that I have had or put together in the past 50 years.
In retrospect:
I think that back then McIntosh was a rich kids toy & highly advertized, so the rich kids that read New Yorker, The New York Times & The Wall Street Journal thought that McIntosh was the best & went for it as only they could afford it - usually sight unseen.
As I stated in my first post: This IS IN MY HUMBLE OPINION & I did not mean to offend anyone! |
I do own Mc and I still feel that there are better options out there for the money these days... |
For me, although Mc sounds good, it's not as liquid and transparent as Krell for example. |
Guys and gals, I'm not worried about why or why not someone likes Mac gear. I don't own any. I assure you that wasn't the point of my post. If I worried of such things could you imagine how the rest of my life would be? I'd probably have died from stress by now. I'm just curious what the audio community has to say about it.
I'm currently thinking about upgrading my Rogue Cronus Magnum to a SS integrated. The way I am, this could take years. I need to cover my bases and I'd be a fool to rule out McIntosh completely. I'm not willing to start buying and selling without |
Sorry. I'm not willing to start buying and selling without researching all brands of integrated amplifiers. Is McItosh worthy of an audition? Well sure it is. At least with my speakers. They all are within reason. |
Sid42, Sentence #3 of your post...............right on! |
Schubert-What is your issue with Sinatra? |
Not sure either. I have been into audio for about 35 years and have had the opportunity to own many pieces of audio equipment. When I was younger I could only afford entry level equipment and over the years appreciated the sound from each device I owned. Never heard of Mac gear until I was much older. I have owned Bryston, Krell, Soundcraftsman, and Octave amps over the last 10 years and now Mac 2301's , which are really excellent sounding to my ears. How long I own these are questionable, however, I think these will be here in use longer than the 6 years I had the Octave amps in use.
I can care less about equipment or automobile bashing, there are haters and lovers of pretty much anything. I race Corvettes and I have to tell you the riivalry between Porsche and Corvette is great, however, drivers of each car respect each other for their driving qualitiies and the performance at the track. When my non-audiophile friends listen to my system, they are simply amazed by the high resolution of the system. So, the Mac sounds great to me and my friends and wife. Does one really need an endorsement from a bunch of old huffy and puffy audio geezers to own any piece of audio equipment? Do you really care about what others think about your buying decisions? Everyone has their own opinions and audio forums have many opiniated users. Obviously really bad sounding equipment with poor build quality will truly stand out among other pieces of audio equipment.
Have a great day and enjoy life!
Audioquest4life |
I only owned one Mc preamp, a C15. It wasn't bad but it wasn't as good as the PS Audio 6.0 preamp it replaced and was no where as good as the McCormack RLD 1 that replaced it.... |
Etbaby has made a very good point about Mcintosh gear, which I have found to be true myself, that sound quality varies from one unit to the next. This could explain the vast differences of opinions about Mac.
Overall I think McIntosh gear is cool looking, well built, and produces a unique house sound that is very good. It would be tough to walk-away from McIntosh without a smile on your face. |
Rpeluso,
Way back when, Schubert lost to Sinatra on the Major Bowes Amateur Hour and has had an axe to grind ever since. HA |
05-16-13: Liquid-smooth
I do own Mc and I still feel that there are better options out there for the money these days...
I saw one of your recent threads, and you seem to think Adcom is one of those better choices. That's funny. |
@Audioquest4life well said my friend, I agree totally. My answer to OP is audiophiles, most of which have an OCD issue, will always bash something that they do not own themselves or can't understand....it fuels their own insecurity of obsessiveness which leads back just like a circle to the OCD issue.
Then of course there are opinions and honest feedback, which is good and help many, that can tactfully be articulated since everyone likes what they like and that is why there are so many avenues with this hobby. Those are the ones that have helped me over the years. Cheers! |
I have also been around audio all my life. I have owned and still do own many different systems , Audio research, krelll , Mark levinsons ,and I have several Mac amps and I love them . I think the reason why they get a lot of resentment from some so called audiophiles is because they don't cater to the snake oil nut jobs , and they are still successful . These so called audiophiles complained about their tone controls, auto transformers, speaker terminals , but Mac disregarded their nonsense and still is a formidable company . While I still do prefer my tube Audio research amps , i will never get rid of my reliable , fantastic sounding Mac amps |
I just saw their demo environment at the SHOW. Very little press post show, but I loved the new D100 pre-amp married to their classic 275 tube amp. They had small studio monitors ($4 grand). Really amazingly musical setup at about 12 grand. |
The description of selling Mac stuff to doctors and lawyers back in the day seems perfect...note again that with every manufacturer (of nearly anything) that's been around that long there's great stuff, and some not so great stuff, and so what? I dig their tube amps and they've received rave reviews recently, so I'm confidant the doctors and lawyers are hearing something sweet. |
I've owned Mac equipment, darn stuff looks awesome IMHO. Wish I had kept my c220, glad I got rid of my MA6300. Have had a hard time finding one of their power amps I like listening to, sure hope I do though, love those blue eyes!! |
i think an underlying principle of all snobbery is that if something (whether it's audio, wine or movies) is very popular, it can't be very good. i also suspect that many have an innate bias against gear which emphasizes aesthetics and form--perhaps we feel that we're paying a super-premium for looks as opposed to performance. all that said, i think some of the above criticisms of the lower-end mac amps and integrateds is valid--i hear a bit of graininess. however, it's inarguable that their stuff is extremely well-built, looks great and is virtually unmatched in terms of collectibility and resale value. |
@Audiolabyrinth, bose and Mcintosh same sentence...really, been there done that....sure you have....and your in a new league now...really and because someone has more dough plowed into a system its better.....you will learn....one day. Just not into equipment slamming...put your system on virtual so I can learn. |
Don't worry about McIntosh, Spectral is sonically inferior, but no one wants to realize. Blue meters count :-) |
Mac get gear has always been at the top of the audiophile brand recognition heep. That makes it the preeminent target even though there is better gear out there, those brands don't have the name recognition that Mac has. It is tough to say your brand is better than a brand no one has heard of.
Mac gear is still a great value at the time of sale and holds it's value as well as any brand.
Still dream fondly of my Mac 240s hooked to a Marantz 7c eminating from a Dual 1219 playing on my Chartwell LS/35as! |
IME, Mac, C-J, & ARC gets a good beating in these forums. |
While I have owned a McIntosh model 78 tuner which I got on a trade for my Marantz 10B and thought it was okay, I have never had any interest in McIntosh equipment. I remember involvement with guys selling McIntosh new speakers going to the hotel at CES and hearing their raves. I can remember they were on the uooer floor in the Alexis Park. I sought them out. I walked in heard their sound briefly and walked out.
What is really interesting about is not hatred by others, but rather how did they ever get a good reputation? They are much like Bose, IMHO. |
I took a musical appreciation class in college at a small liberal arts college. The class was in an acoustically treated room with McIntosh gear. I can't tell you the speakers or what gear specifically but I can say it is one the nicest sounding systems I have ever heard. I would love to have a system that sounded as good as that system did. |
Ive heard a lot of Mc gear and I love it. Granted sound quality is subjective. Some times audiophiles can be as knowledgeable as they are ignorant when lending their approval towards other gear. I see many attitudes like this and they play out the same, "well I have X gear so that's all I like and that's the best". Or a sales man at hifi superstore sold me on this so its the best. Or the best one is, "I cant afford that soo its not that good anyway". Some of the best tube gear Ive ever heard was from Mc. I'm sure someone may chime in and say that I must have not have heard the "truely good" tube gear but that's all bs, Ive heard Lots of tube stuff. McIntosh makes good stuff, love them or hate them they are a competitor and the nonsense someone posted about how 95% of the stuff out there is better, is just ridiculous, and untrue. Mc is up there with the best in my opinion. |
|
It is the isolation transformers that are in most McIntosh components. They make the sound perhaps musical and listenable but not involving and real. Other than the model 78 tuner which I got in a trade, I was never tempted by any of their gear. I had a friend who had one example of everything made by McIntosh. He had one on every step of his stairs to the second floor and on shelves in the bedrooms on the second floor. I never heard him listening to anything. |
Tbg,
You forgot to add IMHO. |
I think that would always apply, but yes, you are right. |
09-06-13: Tbg
"They make the sound perhaps musical and listenable but not involving and real"
Disagree IMO, mine amps certainly do. Maybe for you it's more about listening to your components instead of getting involved in the music, just a guess. Easy for that to happen. |
Pops, I don't want to get involved in another music versus equipment discussion. I hear what I hear, and you do also. |
My introduction to high-end audio was through McIntosh. I had a friend who - in the late 80s - owned most of the 60s stuff - The MC60, MC240, MC30s, the C22, etc. Those units have a special place in my memory since I got my first taste of the audio obsession through those pieces + a pair of Quad ESL-63s.
Fast forward a zillion years, and my love for them has waned. I've heard better since - even in the world of vintage tube amplifiers. Macs have a house sound that many people love, but I find them a tad grainy. For an eye-catching second system, they would be my first choice, but not for my main rig. |
The, (useless), blue VU meters are a BIG reason people buy Mc and one of the main reasons I don't like Mc. It's just smoke and mirrors, kitsch, gimmick....whatever you want to call it. They have definitely fallen into the Harley syndrome. Overpriced and under performing. That's cool if someone wants to buy it. To each his own. But they make themselves a target for attack when they won't stop insisting they are the best. They invite criticism. |
Alycat,
Every company says they are the best, and your other comments are just regurgitated drivel that others have said many times before. They are one of the many flavors out there and Mac is one of them, and one of the more reliable ones at that. |
Yes the big blue power meters are a bit Arnold Schwarzenegger'ish.
But to use transistors all the way through on many of their big power amps, and then to whack an output transformer at the end is just nutz, to me anyway.
Cheers George
|
Georgelofi, transformers on solid state gear is much like the "safety factor" in civil engineering. But it ruins the sound of its life. |
Georgelofi and Tbg,
Please tell the rest of us which pieces you have owned and used in your own systems that that led you to these conclusions. |
as some have mentioned, McIntosh gear is not sonically the performer they once were. I currently have a 35 year old MAC SS amp and it is really quite excellent sounding. It has what Audiozen described as a "older" rounder, smoother less analytical sound than what you hear in most amps today. The newer McIntosh gear seems to me to be not as good a value as the older McIntosh gear. But old McIntosh is nice stuff. |
I heard a current model (302?) high-powered solid state Mac amp on some high efficiency speakers. Yes, this is not the kind of speakers that amp is meant to run, but, this does give one an idea of how it sounds putting out very low power (how most amps actually run most of the time). The sound was extremely lifeless and uninvolving. While a LOT of solid state amps sound flat and lifeless on efficient speakers, this amp was particularly bad.
I have also heard their 275 tube amp and it also does not do anything for me. The amp I heard was of older vintage so I don't know if it was in top form. The newer version of the amp does not appear to have the same kind of construction as the older amp. Google the show "How it is Made" for the episode on the building of the 275 amp (it is on you-tube). I thought that what was shown was pretty disappointing. The construction was incredibly shoddy. The input jacks as well as the speaker outputs are not hardwired--a printed circuit board is pressed into place to make these connections (done in a couple of seconds instead of having to be soldered). The output transformers are spun on a jig in a matter of seconds (compare with how quality transformers are meticulously hand wound); I also did not see anything that suggests that the windings included the complex interleaving that McIntosh was famous for in the past. |
"02-26-15: Roxy54
Georgelofi and Tbg,
Please tell the rest of us which pieces you have owned and used in your own systems that that led you to these conclusions."
I'll turn that around and ask you to explain in technical terms, what sound improvement benefit is there to be had by putting and output transformer on a solid state amp?
Cheers George
|
Some say it is a curse to be beautiful. |
"what sound improvement benefit is there to be had by putting and output transformer on a solid state amp"
To make it sound more tubey maybe? |
