I have seen some Interesting comments about Mcintosh lately

I still think that McIntosh produces a good product.  I would not have spent $6500 on the new MAC6700 receiver if I though it looked,  or sounded sub-par.  My reason for selling it was derived from the amp's "voicing",  a pretty obvious,  IMHO,  tube sounding piece.

So I sez to myself,  "self?  If you have something that sounds like a tube amp but isn't a tube amp,  why not get the tube amp?"

Made sense to me.

The MC275 is one good looking piece of gear, very retro, very modern at the same time.  I much preferred its sonics over the solid state receiver.  (I've owned other Mc solid state,  too.)

Honestly?  Being finally able to afford what I consider to be one of the benchmark brands was also one of my reasons.  I wanted that glow,  that look. I wanted ownership,   the experience.
Which I got.  Now that I've owned it,  enjoyed it,  I've sold it.  

Then again,  I've owned and sold/traded pretty much everything!

Right oblgny, pride of ownership is a big part of the McIntosh allure. I still have a warm spot in my heart for the C26 and 2100, and if I found them cheap might buy just to look at. They're so pretty! I have an MR78 (with the Modafferi update) and MPI4 as much to look at as to use.

I have a mint MR-78 that I would love to sell because I never use it. Believe it or not my wife loves the piece and doesn't want me to sell it. She says it looks pretty. Go figure.

I’m hoping when I get set up in Vancouver/Portland there are some good stations worthy of my MR78. FM radio is still a great way to learn of new artists and music. College stations are usually much better than commercial (the one in Northridge in the San Fernando Valley over the hill from Los Angeles has always been good), but I don’t know what the situation up North is. Gonna mount a rooftop antenna if it’s justified. The MPI 3 & 4 are handy even in a system without a tuner---the scope and other indicators are great diagnostic tools for channel separation, phase, etc., useful for cartridge alignment.

Generalizations typically have their basis in fact somewhere, but not always. I’ll certainly go with #2. The Mac dealer in San Francisco, The House of Music, caters to the wealthy. A very close friend was their repair tech for over 10 years but left not long ago because he couldn’t deal with complete lack of scruples of the new owner.

He told me that the newer Mac gear isn’t particularly durable and is often very difficult to properly service.

Mac made their name on the fine tube gear they built way back when. That tube gear sounded very good then and still sounds that good today.

But it’s not the ultra wealthy that buy the classic old Mac tube gear. Those buyers are mostly true audio enthusiasts who have the money to drop $4k on a tube amp. Here on Audiogon, that’s not all that high a price to pay for a top end tube amp. It’s a boatload more than *I* would spend, but that’s me.

I’ve critically listened to a Mac C22 tube preamp and that’s a very, very fine piece of audiophile gear. Own one of those and you’ll be way happy. But did I buy one last year when I wanted to get into a high-end tube preamp? Nope. Way too expensive. Got me a VTA SP13, brand new built just for me with a phono board, for $1500. Ya can’t buy a Mac C22 for less than $4000 and more like $5000. My VTA SP13 sounds at least as good.

I would certainly agree with #1 for those who are buying new Mac gear. They mostly get it to go with their ultra expensive home theatre systems. Here in the San Francisco area you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting an estate worth over $4 million. Home theatre setups in homes like that aren’t bought at Best Buy. They go to places like House of Music and drop Large Cash on the Best because when you have that much loot, you always buy The Best...

As for #3, 4 and 5 - they just sound like sour grapes to me.