Why do some audiophiles beat up McIntosh?

Because most MAC is sold to rich docs and dentists who use it to play Frank Sinatra which makes us poorer audiopiles both jealous and disgusted. A perfect storm of righteous indignation.

I dont know why exactly but these words are  right on the spot....

Mc Intosh is certainly a good product, very flashy, and who will buy it in bunch?

:)

Schubert is a keen observer...And a great composer, too much talented for his own good tough....

I'm also on another forum and they continually put down JL Audio. Many consider their subs overpriced and poorly built. Buy what you like.

Anything with large meters is OK by me.

Obviously there are many more out there who covet McIntosh than put it down.   Success speaks for itself.

It seems like the haters put to much effort in into hating products for no reason. Audio is totally subjective so it doesn't mater what the haters say or think. It only maters what the owner of the product thinks. It seems that most of haters don't own the products they hate so they are not qualified to pass judgement on anything.

I saw a pair of Mc60s in a Pennysaver ad in 1980 and drove through the snow in Upstate New York to buy them from a guy in a trailer park. They have been bullet proof and have never failed to please. The McIntosh owner stereotype is a doctor with a lot more money than hi-fi knowledge or time who wants a plug and play system that sounds good. Those doctors tend not to lurk here, obsess over tweaks, or listen critically to hardware. They like their music and maybe the exclusivity of the brand. For me, I like the tube glow, sweetly colored euphonics, and heritage of the brand. It's romance I don't get from my ARC, Levinson, or Krell gear.

Mc intosh has a built in market. There will always be doctors and lawyers in this world. They don't have to worry about the latest craze in the market. From a business point of view they are in a great place.

MtAcoustat
They are trying to sign a petition to bring you back on CAM,in case you didn't know.
Cheers
George

And back to you, George: You're right, I don't like the autoformers in their amps, AND I don't care for their cd players either. However, I don't bash the McIntosh brand, which is what I thought this thread was all about. I love the sound, resale is fantastic, and I do own one of their pre's and amps. And although they have had several owners since Frank and Gordon passed, they are still one of the longest lasting USA companies to still be in business since 1949!

As not many would understand Pops.

Source:
My own heavily modded CDP switchable input receiver from PM200 HDCD chip to DF1704
PCM1704K (selected) 24bit R2R ladder Multibit dacs.
Very special zero feed back direct coupled active I/V stage, and pure class A zero feedback output buffer.

Preamp:
Of course one of my passive Lightspeed Attenuator

Amplifiers:
Two x ME-850 stereo bi-polar solid state amps 40kg each.
Real tested measurements were
140w-8ohm
260w-4ohm
490w-2ohm
910w-1ohm
The one ME for the ESL panels, is heavily biased into Class A

http://www.me-au.com/me850data1.jpg

http://www.me-au.com/me850data2.jpg

Speakers:
Two latest aluminium vapour deposited Martin Logan Monolith esl panels, almost identical to the new Neolith panel. My own 3rd order hi-pass passive xover at 150hz
Two ACI SV12 bass units best (bass units ever) in 4cu-ft sealed enclosures discrete active 4th order low-pass xover at 150hz.

Cheers George

George,

What components do you use in your system, notice you do not post a system here on Agon?

Cheers

Hey Sid42: Careful, you've been known to bash the transformer coupled ones as well. These are the only ones I and others believe need to be "bashed".

Quote Sid42
"7200 was/is the best amp they've made, and with no autoformers.. In my experience, all the autofromer models had a "flabby, not tight" bass. The 7200's bass is deep and tight." Quote

Cheers George

This thread is 2 years old now, time to give it up! You either like Mac, or you don't. To each his own opinion. Time to go bash other brands who aren't as successful as Mac, who don't have near enough re-sale value, and may last as long as this winter in the East!!!!!!Too many jealous folks around here who would like to own Mac but can't afford it, and can't think of anything else to do but bash a VERY prosperous and successful brand. Get a life!

Easy just because they cannot afford them, is there better ??? yes there is, is there worst ??? again yes there is, but in my book they are very nice & good looking units but to rich for my blood.

Tbg, yes Mcintosh does make solid state with autoformers. The original solid state Mcintosh amp that I purchased was brand new, it was a direct coupled design. Decided a few days later I wanted the more expensive Mac with autoformers so I was able to trade up and compare the two designs. As mentioned earlier the design with autoformers had a more fuller midrange and the highs were much more refined. But again the bass wasn't as tight and well defined as the direct coupled amp.

By the way I tried to contact you on the other thread and on the website that you directed me to but when I clicked on your name it brought up Outlook Express and wanted me to set up that account with ipp numbers that I didn't know off hand so I quit. My email address is phdunn544@gmail.com

czarivey, that was funny!

Czarivey, no because we can hear.

because they don't have it and want to buy'em cheap.

"02-27-15: Roxy54
I asked YOU what Mac gear you had used in your system that led you to your conclusions. Still waiting for an answer."

How about back in the 70's a pair old school MC275 monoblocks, when they made reasonably good amps, running stacked els57's.

Now you answer, what advantage technically for the sound does putting an output transformer on the rear end of a solid state amp do?
I can think of only one thing that it makes a poorly designed, maybe unstable solid state amp, more reliable and stable.


Cheers George

http://www.zeroimpedance.com/zeroimpedance_014.htm

check out the Paul Speltz Zero page where he discusses the benefits of using autoformers between the amp and speakers.

still, Mc gear never did sound good to me.

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

Oh no you don't. I never said that there was a "sound improvement" because of the output transformers. I asked YOU what Mac gear you had used in your system that led you to your conclusions. Still waiting for an answer.

I also saw the show how it's made. I was really surprised how shoddy the mc 275 was made. I always thought mc was really well made gear. After seeing that show I was not impressed. I generally hate Chinese made gear but I even think the Chinese could do a better job than mc does. I have a feeling that in the future mc will start making their gear in China. If they do it will be no great loss. Anyone that has seen that episode of how it's made knows what I am talking about.

A big reason why some love to hate Mcintosh is a kind of class envy. Yes, there are those who could afford it but simply prefer another favour, but those for the most part hold no grudge or agenda.

I've seen this attitude among those who won't or can't pay more than entry level prices. The hate is silly, but there you are. Who cares, really.

I'm with Georgelofi, for the life of me I can't imagine why they still put trannies are on their ss amps?
When Mac started, they provided a level of quality, durability and consistency that was somewhat unique for the era. They seem to have fallen behind in terms of innovation.
Every time I've heard Mac gear I found them to be lacking in dimensionality and transient response. Not my cup of tea. YMMV.

Phd, now comparing two identical amps with and without autoformers would be very interesting. I didn't know they made such animals.

"02-26-15: Larryi
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."

Yes I heard this also, if your going to have a transformer hanging off a solid state amp, god knows why,
it should at least be interleaved. They stoped doing those a long time ago, as it was so labour intensive.

Cheers George

Mapman I used to own a more recent Mcintosh solid state amp with autoformers (output transformers) and in my opinion, what I found was the midrange and highs improved considerably when compared to direct coupled Mcintosh amp. However the bass seemed to be more loose.

"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?

Some say it is a curse to be beautiful.

"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

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.

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.

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.

Georgelofi, transformers on solid state gear is much like the "safety factor" in civil engineering. But it ruins the sound of its life.

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

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.

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.

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.

Pops, I don't want to get involved in another music versus equipment discussion. I hear what I hear, and you do also.

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.

I think that would always apply, but yes, you are right.

Tbg,
You forgot to add IMHO.

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.

One word....... Jealous

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.

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.

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.

IME, Mac, C-J, & ARC gets a good beating in these forums.

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!