I have seen some Interesting comments about Mcintosh lately

Good Lord. It's Beavis and Butthead around here. Heck I've owned all of the items Schubert (and others) rail(s) against including all of the watches (for and against) and still have some of that stuff today (OK I sold my AMG - a car that I love to this day).

This type of exchange is what kills intelligent exchange on Audiogon. Let me summarize one side of the equation that is particularly frustrating: "MB is bad and overpriced, Rolex is bad and overpriced, McIntosh is bad and overpriced. You are an idiot for buying stuff that I don't think is good and/or is overpriced. You paid too much money because you want prestige. Rolex's are ugly. The Mona Lisa is a piece of ****" OK I added the last one, but you get the drift. The exchange in an audio forum ends with a discussion about watches! So the exchange really had nothing to do with audio and is all about value judements. 

IMO some of you guys appear as shock-jock neophytes (you may not be, but that's what you appear to be). After reading some of these postings I've concluded that there is very little to be learned in the forums because of the domination of the Jerry Springer exchanges (yeah that dates me). Unfortunately, it appears that the "he who shouts loudest wins" effect is in operation. Or at least the "he who is rudest wins" effect works here. 

There are few of you out there I do appreciate, you've got ears and you've got manners. I do appreciate the gentlemanly way in which some of the posters have conducted themselves in this thread and other threads as well, you've been helpful to me (you know who you are). I don't like the mean-spirited tit-for-tat exchanges.

Apparently all one has to do to get some folks to rail is to put McIntosh in the subject line. It's no wonder that there are other forums where owners of various product lines discuss those products without the "shout downs" here at Audiogon.

While I am conscious of subjectivity of the comment and hate to hear myself say it because I always want to give a more definitive answer: It is particularly true with stereo equipment that synergy between the components, the listener, and the room itself creates the sound so the carte blanche condemnation of an entire brand is ridiculous.

"nuff said. I may be done in the forums. The "Nanny nanny boo-boo" stuff is worthless and not productive or instructive. Have at me Beavis's. I don't plan on responding. It's pretty apparent that you don't know what you are talking about. I know my opinion doesn't matter - I don't know anything, I'll admit it. So I don't have to respond. You win: Rolex sucks, MB sucks, McIntosh sucks. Huuh. Huh. - Hee. He.

Tubegroover, you've got it right.

I can handle banter, but it's the Jerry Springer shout downs that chill the environment: I'm right!!!! And you can't be!!!! On both sides. Although I do think the McIntosh advocates are somewhat demure in their defense of the product. As for me, I don't need to go to a Mc lovefest forum, but I think those forums partially exist because there's a Mc hatefest over here. 

I've heard some really weird systems that blow top self products out of the water, Frankinstein stuff, 4 way speakers with the crossovers electronically managed for the room and each of the set of drivers driven by a different amplifier matched to achieve the clarity and/or warmth desired (so 4 amplifiers for a 4 way speaker) in those particular frequency ranges. Yes they were engineers with too much time and money on their hands.