Why No McIntosh Recommendations?

The MC501 (Stereophile review), MC452 (Enjoy the Music), MC462 (Stereophile) were all highly praised and highly recommended by seasoned audio critics. 
(I own a MC452, driven by a ARC Reference 3 linestage powering some Yamaha NS-1000Ms') And the Yamaha's big beryllium midrange is unstoppable. Jazz, rock or classical; they do it all well.  I bought the NS-1000's new in about 1985.  The only speaker I thought that came close to their sound in it's ability to satisfy was the B&W 802 and 803 diamond series.   .....Yet I digress..... 

The McIntosh sound is exceptional.  I don't need the cosmetics or big blue meters, or the shiny handles; I'm not impressed by its' 105 pound weight or that Mac's hold their resale value fairly well; I bought and loved the MC452 for it's glorious mid-range, it's sonic detail and it's ability to reproduce every type of music with speed, delicacy and slam when needed.  ...And McIntosh equipment is very well-built.  Look inside them: they're very well thought-out.  

Output transformers: I listened to many combinations, whether they had output transformers or not. I can't detect any sonic signature with output transformers.  Some readers may think I just don't know what I'm hearing. I have been critical listening since I was teenager, and I'm 59 now.  Of course it's true all our thoughts and musical emotions are filtered through our own personal psyche and subject to opinion.  Many things can't really be proven or disproven (i.e, is this mains cable improving or detracting from its' musicality...?) 

 I've heard some audiophiles even question Ohm's Law.  By the way: you can't.....

I find the ARC Ref 3/ McIntosh 452/ Yamaha NS-1000M combination so satisfying that for the last few years I've had no desire to "upgrade." Everytime I listen, I just feel, "I can't believe this sounds so good"
  

@stringreen has it right.  Mc is BEAUTIFUL and pretty much always has been (very old Mc stuff is ugly, but so was everything back then--Marantz, etc.)

BUT, as I have posted before, it simply did not SOUND very good on revealing speakers like Maggies.  I LOVE their Sequerra-like display on the thing they made that showed performance--forgot its name as that was 45 years ago--and clearly they are built like battleships.  So was/is(?) Mark Levinson. 

Both these companies products did not hold up when SOUND was compared.  Well built, yes.  Broke like other brands, yes.  Good service, yes.  Expensive/showy, yes.

Now, today, they have different products, so you have to judge for yourself if their new stuff is better SOUNDING than their old stuff.

Cheers!

I might agree with dylanmorris, I’ve been in high end for over 40 years and have had and changed every brand possible. McIntosh represents a reliable, well sounding presentation I’m satisfied with at this time and probably longer. Happy with my McIntosh system. 

You become a McFan along the way.  Looking around the room I love the mix of McIntosh products.  I appreciate both tube and tradtional units.  Sitting side by side, a Mc 2102 and a CJ Premier 140.  Both fresh factory complete upgrades.  Each amp presents a uniqueness...probally why I switch between...  
I am a McFan and enjoy my McIntosh products.  

This sure is a love hate topic. 
I’ve heard several high end amps and feel at a certain price point no one amp sounds
bad. The differences are so subtle that  aesthetics and flexibility and trade in value 
play a huge roll for me and I’m sure many. 
Five years ago I picked up a 30 year old
Mcintosh MA6200 for a $1000. My buddy 
who has had nothing but high end Bryston
Amps could not believe how this old Mcintosh smoked his $5k amp in every way. ‘ We both run Harbeth 30.1 so it’s not the speakers ‘
I recently upgraded to the Mcintosh MA 6600 and sold the 6200 for $1,400, $400
more than I paid. I bought the 6600 used
and couldn’t be happier, this is certainly the last amp I’ll ever own. 😎