I have seen some Interesting comments about Mcintosh lately


These comments come from here and a couple of other sites.

1.The only people that buy Mcintosh gear are one's that just don't listen.
2. Mcintosh is what rich people buy just like Mercedes Benz.
3. Mcintosh relies on generational buyers as a business plan.
4. Mcintosh is known for rebranding products and putting there name on it.
5. Mcintosh has great looks but uses cheap off the bin parts.

I can't think of another high-end company that have so many stereotypes about the brand. On the other hand I can't think of another audio company that has been in business as long.


taters
i forgot mamas G550 with 110 k has Never been to the shop except routines...but she tends to not whale on the apex.....

i also forgot to rail on Ducati...even tho I cant actually go fast on a real road racing bike...

tubegroover---I didn’t make my point very well. The McIntosh tube electronics of the 50’s and 60’s were unquestionably among the best available at the time, and found in true audiophile systems. And Frank and Gordon were creative, inventive, excellent design engineers. But they were also conservative, putting reliability above all else (as does Roger Modjeski of Music Reference now)---not a bad thing! Sound quality was important, but was not the MOST important consideration in their designs. Long, trouble-free operation was, glamorous aesthetics (the Mac backlit faceplate is still my favorite look in Hi-Fi) being very important as well. They designed McIntosh products to appeal to, as I have said before, the "Carriage Trade" (an old term)---Professionals who wanted "the best". The readers of Playboy, say. Amongst hardcore audiophiles, however, Marantz tube electronics were more respected and lusted after. When Bill Johnson introduced his Audio Research SP-2 pre-amp and Dual 50 and 100 amps in 1970, they replaced Marantz 7’s, 8’s, and 9’s in audiophile systems, not Macs. Then there were the small companies making extremely high-performance products for fanatics, like Futterman. Trouble free operation was obviously not a high priority for Julius! The absolute best sound possible was, damn everything else. A degree of reliability would be gladly sacrificed to eek the last iota of SQ out of a design.

When they switched to solid state, McIntosh’s standing in the audiophile community dropped drastically. That’s when McIntosh really became about well built "lifestyle" products, not high-performance Hi-Fi.

I know the Mcintosh people hate to hear it but I think bdp24 really nailed it.

Tube reliability. Now, there’s an oxymoron for ya. It’s because they are inherently UNreliable that you don’t see any more tube gear in military or commercial aviation. That all went away in the ’80s. Why? Reliability. The reason that old McIntosh tube stuff demands high prices today is not because of reliability. It’s because of sound quality. Sound you can reach out and touch. It's always the reason there are so many tube electronics available today to audiophiles.  Sound quality.  But if it's reliability you crave, it looks like it's gonna be transistors for you. Reliability is a number.

Thanks for your explanation bdp. While I never considered most McIntosh gear past the 70's "cutting edge" I really feel quite differently about some of their earlier products of the 50's and 60's. I've listened to some quite incredible Mac systems based on some of these earlier designs. One in particular back in the late 80's had me searching for a nice pair of MC60s which I located and still have to this day although not in regular use. While I DO agree that their early designs are rather conservative there is MUCH that can be done to improve performance. After all, they still have those marvelous unity coupled transformers!