McIntosh -- good for show, not for sound, says dealer

@overthemoon It's safe for me to say that "this forum causes drinking."

I go back to my Lexus comparison. Lexus owners, as with McIntosh don't have an inferiority complex. They enjoy what they have and don't feel the need to bash others.

I agree, and I suspect that the YouTube guy would say "Enjoy what you want. It's a free country." 

What he is claiming, though, is that while you're enjoying the Mc experience, you are foregoing better quality experience with other gear. In part, he says, you're taken in by the looks of Mc. In part, you're just stuck in a comfy cage. You've settled for lesser gear. Are you content? Sure. So are those who eat pork rinds and call them gourmet food. But you're missing out on the real audiophile experience that Mc. cannot deliver.  

So, he's not bashing Mc owners, per se. He's pitying them for being stuck. And he's warning those not yet owning Mc gear  -- or the other brands which are not truly audiophile as he defines it -- to steer clear of those audio cul-de-sacs.

I think the Mc fans here have more or less countered these claims. I'm just pointing out that he's not really bashing people so much as saying they're deluded in thinking they've gone into true audiophile territory.

@stephens770

Ok OP, no disrespect but that was a very ignorant post. None of my 8 pieces of Mc gear did I buy for looks. Nor am I stuck in any way in my decisions. Are you saying that you know for a fact that his Rolland 625’s sound better in my system than my Mc 901’s. You don’t. This hobby is experiencing a renaissance of new growth and people like you are a detriment to this hobby and it potential based on your last post. Generic blanket statements of ignorance. That is the issue with these bash threads and why I chose to speak up. AG should realize their opportunity for growth is hindered by members like yourself.

"People like you." Well, thanks a lot. But you’re confusing what I’m asserting with what I take the video to be asserting. You’re "shooting the messenger." Such misreadings hinder the discussion. Re-think it.

@femoore12

Those of you in this forum that post this elitist BS only do it because you know it "stirs the pot" in this forum.

I assume you’d agree that there is a difference between pointing out what is being said with agreeing or endorsing what is being said. You can see from the OP that I’m not endorsing. It’s being said in the video, it’s fatuous and hobby-damaging nonsense, and I’ve called it out. Others here (like @jjss49 ​​​​​@oldhvymec and all the other Mc owners) have provided the disproof. It’s called a thorough debunking and in my opinion, it’s better to debunk BS than pretend it doesn’t exist. At this point, I’d consider the video debunked.

@femoore12  Thank you for your post. If we're alike, sometimes we both read things quickly and respond quickly. I appreciate you following up.

@oldhvymec  Apparently,  you're just one of those audiophiles -- or someone with a lawyer's office -- who is just looking to impress people with looks. 

I'm kidding you, of course. Totally respect your opinion and take your appreciation of Mac gear as something with serious substance. Just goes to show what people will say on the internet to get a following, to prove they're "honest," or a "truth-teller."

Most propaganda begins with the lie, "Let me be honest with you, here, if I may..."

Consider a public health alert. 

@paradisecom "random doorknob" -- LOL. Stealing that one. 

Mikey has already helped me with getting my system to sound better with my current amp. I’m upgrading my amp and preamp, going with NAT Audio gear from him. He brings tremendous value and only cares about helping people get the best sonics as they can. Anybody that can’t appreciate that has issues with hurt feelings.

Glad you’re having a good experience.

As I see it, he’s made a very broad brush distinction between "people who just care who audio looks" with "the real audiophiles who care about sound."

We can all agree that’s a fair distinction. But his next move is to start herding people into the camp of looks (effectively calling them non-audiophiles) by dint of brand association. It becomes an "us" vs. "them" strategy that names names. That kind of tribalism -- he calls his fans/customers a "tribe" -- is reminiscent of the worst instincts we have. It turns us against one another in politics, religion, orientation, and more. Don’t we have enough of that?

He could have argued the "looks only" vs. "quality-sound" distinction without naming brands. He could have said, "listen for this" or "check these specs or build," etc. But instead, he went after a bunch of companies which make good products. Are all of them 100%, consistently, good? Probably not. (Is every Mercedes a winner?) Are all of them fairly priced? Kinda up to the buyer to decide that.

As someone above pointed out (I think), this seems desperate. It’s the YouTube version of a giant "Sale!" sign in his shop. He needs customers and he has a schtick -- the "Come to me -- I’ll hook you up with the *really* good stuff." Or, "Are you done worshipping false gods? Because I have a line on the Real Deal." He has set himself up as the authority above and beyond all influence, all marketing, all folderol. But then you realize -- he's just another seller, promising to be on your side, a "man of peace," to quote Dylan.

@mahgister Right on cue! LOL! Love it.

However, once the room is optimized, then it does come down to the gear. As we've agreed on another thread -- two equally good rooms (equally optimized) will be different if the gear is different. 

Many people don't know or do enough about their room acoustics. The room is a system of acoustics and perception. But the gear is part of the system, and just as neglect of the room leads to worse acoustics, worse gear does, too, because it's all part of the system. So that leads back to gear. 

Turning people against one another is one way of looking at what he says. I look at it like that's his opinion. Saying he's turning people against one another feeds into permanent disagreement and division. That's your opinion of what's happening, it doesn't make it true. 

@vuch 

Point taken. So, it is my *argument* (not "opinion") that he is name-bashing in the video. He is over-generalizing in the video. It is an old "David vs. Goliath" trope. You buy it. I don't. You're working with him, I'm not. 

I don't own any of the gear he bashes. I don't work with him. I have no dog in this fight, but I see what he's up to. It's pretty obvious.

Oh, and I'm not "canceling" him. I'm calling him out for *what he actually says.* The charge of cancellation smacks of desperation when when it's used to sub in for a counterargument.

@vuch  I agree. Peace.

@jjss49 

fascinating to me what transpires on this thread, not sure if this is what @hilde45 intended with his op

I didn't know how people would react. Here is how I see things. As the article I posted weeks ago show (from a well research Japanese business journal article), the forces which cause hifi equipment to succeed or fail are based on a number of factors. They don't all need to be named, but the two relevant for this thread are (a) forum discussions and (b) reviewers (now including YouTube).

When I seen reviews on YouTube which make strong claims (to thousands of people --3.8k in just two days), I sometimes like to see what others with a stake in the hobby think about those claims. In the course of this, facts are sometimes corrected, bad reasoning is highlighted, and hidden motivations are ferreted out. Sometimes people just say they agree with the review for x, y, or z reasons.

Reviewers, dealers, makers are all in these forum discussions, too. They pay attention because they know that comments sometimes matter. Comments build or tear down products or even brands. 

Seeing so many people with experience and knowledge come to defend McIntosh is an interesting result. For the hobbyist out there considering McIntosh and searching for comments, they can now find both this thread and the YouTube video in question. This thread adds to the conversation and perhaps helps someone make a decision.

If this was just about "opinion," no one would care, no one would post. The issue is not "freedom of opinion" (banal phrase) but the "truth or falsity of claims." Sometimes those claims are about taste -- but we argue about taste all the time. Clearly, there's something at stake, and something we use to stand up our claims.

Took a couple days off social media. I see things are still going.

Reviewing the video and this thread, it’s clear that the video is not really about McIntosh. Jay (who made his own video about McInstosh) missed the what I think is the main point in OCD’s video. What is that point? Well, he’s advising people about how to sort out what to buy.

He begins by sorting audiophiles into two exclusive groups.

His first distinction, quoting the video here, is this "split:":

"You’re either a guy for display or you’re a guy for sonic and you don’t care about display." He continues, "Are you someone who you want something that visually is striking so that when people come over to your place to listen they’re visually arrested by the look of your rig and they’re awestruck by how grandiose it is okay or how beautiful it is or how amazing it is?"

If you’re about how things look, he has an example:

A "perfect example [is] macintosh, okay. You guys know that it’s a brand I don’t really like because I just don’t think it sounds that good; I think it’s overpriced."

And people who like looks are wowed by it. Ok, so it just seems at this point like one person’s opinion.

But, then he makes the sweeping claim:

"For people that are in hi-fi, we look at it and we’re like ‘Oh cute little green LED, that’s pretty kitschy,’ you know; ‘Oh that’s nice,’ you know. But I get where the market segment is -- it’s [McIntosh] not really...for the audiophile. I think macintosh is for the person that wants to *show* that they’re an audiophile; they want people to *recognize* them *as* an audiophile through a visual cue -- which means people that don’t know crap about hi-fi, okay? Because people that really know about hi-fi look at McIntosh -- the ones that [are] real audiophiles -- we know it doesn’t sound that good."

Who is McIntosh for, then? McIntosh is good, he says,

"for people that don’t really know, okay? For people that...are in their infancy of their hi-fi that aren’t real audiophiles but they’ve just started hi-fi; they’re going to be impressed because they know how much that [McIntosh gear] costs; the first level of person has no idea what it even is -- they’re going to be blown away by how it looks [but in fact] they have no clue."

But this is not just about McIntosh hate. That’s too simple. It’s about creating two categories — those who are fooled by looks and don’t understand what good sound is, and those who manage to get past superficial looks (and price). This is a video for people who are confused and need guidance. They want to hear good sound and they need a guru. This categorization is the first lesson being offered by this guru. It’s not a question of one internet dude's opinion. He is arguing for a fundamental dualism — looks vs. sounds. And those who accept that dualism will trust the guy who taught it to them. (And maybe buy his gear.)

This is also not just about McIntosh. It’s an Us-Them rhetoric, and all such rhetoric needs examples. McIntosh is just the first and easiest example to support the dubitable claim that there are (only) two kinds of audiophiles (the visually-mesmerized and the sonically-enlightened.) But then he adds in other brands. He mentions Focal,Wilson, Magico, too. About these brands he says,

"Man, they have the visual nailed, but they do not have the audio nailed." They are among, he says, "these visual brands for people that have elegant homes" filled with people where, "you’re the big man you know sitting in front of this gorgeous thing."

This is why this video is interesting (to me). It’s not about McIntosh at all. It’s about whether there are two kinds of audiophiles, whether looks and sonics are mutually exclusive, and (at the meta-level) whether dealers who advance these kinds of characterization about these dilemmas are operating in service of the hobby or just in service of their wedge into the business of the hobby.

@femoore12

I’ve actually received criticism by members of this site because I stated the design aesthetics of the equipment I purchase is actually important to me.

First off, we’re good. I appreciate your kind words.

Next, the (video author’s) notion that how something looks and sounds are completely distinct -- indeed, unrelated -- is a ridiculous move (and it is a move).

Has he ever eaten a meal that was well-presented (or "plated" as they say in the biz)? Of course looks matter. Aesthetic experience involves the whole person. No one ever complains if a stereo makes you tap your toes, right? So, motor senses like touch are relevant to audio but not sight? How many audiophiles should be dissed for their lava lamps or their lighting because clearly (the idiot logic goes) that is evidence they don’t really care about the sound? None. None should be dissed.

People who love cars get it. Form AND function can go together. And a company that can produce really great functioning cars can put that talent into their form, too. It’s not necessarily a sign that they’ve diverted precious resources away from the function side, right? Well that’s another claim made by the video author.

Are there charlatans that are only about looks? Sure. Do con-jobs happen with looks? Hello, trophy-wife or trophy-husband! But the notion that IF there are good looks, THEN there is inadequate attention to the content is (as I said) a rhetorical gambit meant to sucker in the confused. You are not suckered, nor am I!

@oldhevymec's comment about the author's appearance reminds me of Nietzsche's comment about Socrates.

"In origin, Socrates belonged to the lowest class: Socrates was plebs. We know, we can still see for ourselves, how ugly he was. But ugliness, in itself an objection, is among the Greeks almost a refutation. ... And Socrates merely answered: "You know me, sir!"

@eugene81 

with the McIntosh I could easily get lost in the music.

Ding ding ding! That's the criteria the video guy hauls out as the ultimate test of an audio system. The fact that McIntosh does that for you -- and I assume many others, here -- is about as good a refutation as one could hope for. The only reply the video guy could make is, "Well, you don't know what really good sound is like." To which the only answer is, "Go home."

We only care about the looks of gear here, Mike, so no need to weigh in. Only fake audiophiles here. But thanks for caring.

@mikepowellaudio

The claims you made in the video were quoted, verbatim. They were outrageous. You got some over-the-line flak, here, but there were others who defended you and others who made specific points about what you said. But rather than own up to what you said -- or man up and try to defend it -- you’d rather pull a middle-school move and say it was just an "opinion"? To disparage this forum and its members?

Taking the nasty, dodgy route just highlights your true character. Future customers might want to look out for Stereo11. They might get insulted, or worse.

Don't be coy. You want the views, the subscribers, the clicks, the love. Your channel has 12.8k subscribers and your video got 5.3k views in a little over a week. Like it or not, you’re beyond single dude with an opinion. You’re playing a professional businessman. It’s time to grow up.

@jjss49 Your reported exchange with Stereo11’s Mr. Powell shows that his irascibility and petulance -- exhibited in his videos and in his posts on this forum -- can extend to his dealings with customer. To quote Maya Angelou again, "When someone shows you who they are...believe them."

Those who have gotten good service from Stereo11 have their experience and, judging from his YouTube comments, he has lots of fanboys willing to attack anyone who questions him. But fanboys on YouTube does not a business model make.

He’s flailing. He’s angry. And pouring it out on others isn’t helping. He’s crapping in his own back yard. If he has any friends out there reading this, he needs an intervention. Go help him.

I take it that smaller one take-away from this whole exchange is that it's a turn off to see dealers who don't carry a particular brand (McIntosh, Magico, Wilson, are the video's examples) try to boost what they sell by dismissing or denigrating another brand. @kaplandesign -- you clearly carry good brands, as evidenced here:

https://www.kaplanhtdesign.com/Brands.html

But you're engaging in McIntosh bashing on this thread. So, maybe you do believe what you're saying based on experience; ok, I'll stipulate that for the sake of argument.

The objection argued for here is that your position as a seller of competing brands, you're better off -- you, your business is better off --  taking the high road and not denigrating what is effectively your competition. 

Here is your opportunity to retract your comments and apologize, or double down and be lumped together with the Mike Powell Scorched-Earth-Business-Strategy.

It isn’t a requirement to love Mac, or ANY brand / product.

That seems eminently defensible. Very, very safe thing to claim.

It would be pretty damn boring if we all had the same gear, same tastes etc..

This, too, is very, very true. Almost tautologically true. 

@stephens770 It was sarcasm. "Unvarnished" added to "truth" was hyperbole meant to convey irony. I have no "purposes." Sorry it wasn’t clearer. I'd hope that your reading of my other posts make the case (to you, to others) that the video is ridiculous, irresponsible nonsense. No way for a dealer to behave.

@middlemass Thanks.

Let's move on to the poster below who said,

The point is he gave an honest opinion about McIntosh.

Sorry, but that’s not the point of what I have said or what his video was about. You have rendered an oversimplification, a deflection, and obviously so. If what he said was only about a brand, who cares. This is about audiophiles in general, not just about "McIntosh", pro or con. Because he bashes Wilson and Magico, too. Did you hear that part?

Here’s a post where I really try to help those not getting it:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/mcintosh-good-for-show-not-for-sound-says-dealer/post?postid=2341061#2341061

Don’t believe me or my quotes from the transcript? Ok, go -- rewatch the video. You’ll see that McIntosh is just his main whipping boy. Sure, he thinks McIntosh is a very bad value and doesn’t sound good.

But his POINT is that the kind of people who like McIntosh are fooled by the looks, that they’re part of a whole world of audiophiles who think that bling = good audio. He has anointed himself to show people that there are two doors in audio, the "looks good" or the "sounds good" door. He has set himself up as the guru if you want to avoid the false audiophile "looks" door. (Oh, and of course he would never sell that stuff!)

Again, it’s not just about McIntosh. Because that other type of person -- the fool very often taken in by McIntosh, but sometimes by Wilson, Magico, and lots of other brands -- are not true audiophiles.

Lots of cognitive dissonance here for those who had a good experience with him. Mazel tov, bros. You got him on a good day. Not everyone has, as reported here.

Others who review this forum’s thread can make up their mind about whether they want to shovel thousands of $$’s his way. It’s clear he knows a lot about audio but he’s also a seller. He’s made other videos claiming to "just be delivering the truth" and that so many others in audio are just shilling, writing commercially motivated reviews, on the take. He has, in other videos, put himself *above* that. I reacted once on a thread to the conflict of interest he has in claiming that everyone else is just selling but he’s just speaking truth. He derided me, tried to say I was just another audio seller out to ding him. I’m not in the industry. I’m a freakin’ hobbyist. I have a day job completely unrelated to audio. But when people don’t have a real defense for what they said, they turn to attack. If you look at his responses, they’re frequently doing that. That means he has no real defense. Caveat emptor, folks.

Why is this thread still going?  Moderators should close it as nothing more constructive will come from this. 

Unlike Stereo5, I'd prefer that moderators not close threads using their judgment about whether it is "constructive" or not. Because that same kind of capricious censorship could shut off individual comments which are not constructive, such as Stereo5's, which -- while not constructive -- does not violate any of the rules of the forum.

Mike Powell posts to me:

OP, why dont you join me in a Zoom chat we record to discuss what you think you know ... ?? Ill post in on YT ..... Ill be polite and you can ask me questions and get answers because you are currently assuming a lot as if you know what you are talking about.

Your promise to be polite but in your invitation is already a veiled insult ("what you think you know"). No, you’ve already proved your ability to be abusive. You can make another video -- calling this "the yellow" site and calling folks here "hens" etc. No, your invitation to name-call and abuse on Zoom is politely declined.

And what do I "know"? I have not claimed to know anything -- I have posted your video, your comments, verbatim. As you can see on this thread, many took offense to what you said -- again, your words, taken verbatim. Those not recalling can look on 02-15-2022 at 06:13am. It's not the only point where I rehearse what you said, but it will do. People who wish to could also re-watch your video. They can judge for themselves.

I’m done with you, dude. You tried to stir the pot in the guise of truth-teller, you pissed a lot of people off, and now rather than say something simple like, "I overstated things" you’re making more videos and doubling down. I don’t think you’re a bad guy, but you’re not owning up to your hyperbole on your video and your trash-talking, here. This is why I suggested that friends help you with an intervention. It’s not because you’re all that messed up -- you clearly know a lot and you have a passion for audio -- but an intervention is appropriate because you are refusing to see what to most everyone else is obvious.

I will not reply to further comments from you. People can agree with my summary of the situation or not, but the matter to me is plain -- you will not address what you said, and prefer to attack rather than offer up a crumb of contrition. Goodbye.

@schw06 +1 for a very thoughtful post.

And I’ve said this many times on this thread, but I’ll say it once more: the main issue for me is not about McIntosh or Wilson or Magico or any specific brand. It was his presumption that he could divide those who like what they hear from those brands from "genuine" audiophiles. Remember, that was the point of bashing McIntosh -- to say that it has fooled people (e.g. with its reputation, blue lights, etc.) who don’t really know how to listen. The other brands fool people in other ways.

You cut through all that malarkey when you say,

the experience I’m looking for in music is to turn my left brain off and get lost in the music and his system didn’t do that for me.

And there we have it. There are *multiple* goals a music system can fulfill. And your goal -- and the goals of many others -- are fulfilled for you in a way which makes this youtubber’s system unsuitable. And it also proves his divisive dualism false. Q.E.D.

@rman9 You did the right thing by switching off. Notice on the threads (here and on his own youtube channel) how he calls people who disagree with him a "shill"? Conspiratorial, name-calling, angry, mean guy. Whatever he knows about audio, he behaves execrably online and there are way too many better places and people to spend money on audio. I would never recommend anyone buy anything from this guy.

@dagda

That triggers what I assume to be grown men to loose their effing minds!

Bro, this forum is sometimes like dudes at a bar with a few beers in them.

Thinking about that as a possible context might help talk you off the ledge.