I've always been interested in where McIntosh fits in as far as the way audio gear is categorized. You don't seem to hear about it (not here but in general) talked about a lot in either tube, vintage SS, or "high end audiophile"(big $, in other words) circles, even though Mc gear fits into every one of them. Does McIntosh by nature place themselves out of most discussions, as in too "audiophile" for Vintage SS, too mainstream for "audiophiles", and too "untweakable" for tube guys?

I'm just curious how everyone that has and hasn't owned McIntosh gear to categorize your thoughts on the brand. It seems to a great extent amplification-wise that Vintage people gravitate more towards the big 3 (Sansui Pioneer Marantz), while the Tube and "audiophile" go after what I would term something similar to "microbrew" audio.

Let's hear your thoughts.

I think for a long time, McIntosh was THE standard American made SS and Tube equipment. The problem is - they are so well liked, it is hard to buy a piece of equipment that isn't overpriced, now.

Dave

Well I put McIntosh on a higher plane than Marantz, Sansui or Pioneer. Mac really is the quintessential American made high quality audio gear. It's high quality gear that's priced accordingly. However it's not SO expensive as to be out of reach of the dedicated consumer. I think at price points much higher than Mac's the return for the dollar is very slim. You're really paying for exclusivity and panache when you buy a Krell or a Mark Levinson. I mean sh$t they build nice gear with high quality parts but they didn't reinvent the wheel.

Mike

My Mc2205 C28 combo cost me $1250 used.

looking through closed ebay auctions, that compares (maybe favorably) to a Pioneer Spec-1/2 combo. the Spec-2 went for $1025.00. The Pioneer at 250 RMS boasts a mild 50 Watt per channel increase. I'd guess similar Sansui & Marantz stuff is in that ballpark as well.

While I have no doubt the Pioneer combo is fine, fine, fine...It difficult to imagine it outpeforming the Mcintosh.

I've been inside a SX-1280, a G-33000, and the McIntosh stuff. The build quality on the Pioneer and Sansui are great but...The build quality on the Mc goes a little bit farther IMHO. It's possible it'd even up if the Japanese stuff were separates (the Sansui kinda is) but I'd argue the Mc's price point is about the same.

The 1280 just doesn't touch the Mc combo in sound reproduction.

Now, if you start looking at used Yamaha or Kenwood items that are built well but for whatever reason don't sell as high, then Mc might look pricey.

I don't think it's overpriced at all.

Kam- the only thing I can offer you on this is my own biased input, mainly formed during my sojourn in the late 60s through the 70s.

In that time frame, Mc gear was sought after by the unknowing (of course, this was from others, like me, who 'knew stuff') who wished to move beyond the prototypical Japanese Junk (hey, just giving the thoughts of the time, OK?).

It was looked at (by those like myself:p: ) as solid, reliable, but nothing special and UGLY! Guess we didn't understand 'classic looks and build'. Felt that the sonic return didn't meet the going price.

However, even then, there was a STRONG contingent of Mc afficianados who swore by the stuff. To them, Mc represented the pinnacle of audio bliss, and they would spend endless hours talking about their gear (notice I didn't say talking about the sound). Course, they had many years to talk about it, as the stuff kept working on and on and ...

Long story short- McIntosh always went to the beat of its own drum, never being marketed as 'audiophile' and getting exposure in Stereophile (probably didn't feel the need to underwrite the then current mags), getting no exposure in the general mags (Stereo Review, Audio) as its price was out of the range of their normal subscriber.

I didn't at the time have any overwhelming desire to own Mc equipment, though it seemed that many around me did. Too bad, as at that time it was somewhat affordable through military exchanges (mayhaps that's what turned me off- too available?)

Then, as now, it was a misfit, being in neither camp as you and others have stated. Worthless, therefore you should just send it to me so you don't get infected and become a misfit youself (sorry, too much Mac reading)

McIntosh....how does it fit in? The cool 'spensive stuff I always liked and could never hope to afford.;)

Echo nailed it.

I am working on a mc2505 amp right now. It was not working when I bought it pretty cheap. I have since removed about 6 burnt parts (lowcost resistors, a diode and cap) I have aquired a schematic and parts list from a super guy on the net. The circuits are not complicated. I hope to have this working for under $10 in parts. I believe this amp dates to 1969. It's build quality is better than any vintage japanese gear I have seen. Is it worth it??
I have to wait 'till I get it working and hear it. For $100 with a brand new glass faceplate, it will be worth it to me when I get it working.

Mc Prices are at an all time low. Most Int amps, Preamps and tuners can be had for not much more then TOTL Marantz gear ( in some cases cheaper). Is there a comparison ? not to me but thats all a preference.

I'd agree with most of the comments. Mac is like GM, it's been around for a long time and is well-respected. So why don't more guys own their stuff? Don't know. I've never had a desire myself. And Kam, you're right I think alot of guys, after awhile, want something more exotic. And if they can solder, go the DIY route like Luther and Billfort. Now that stuff is way cooler than JUST buying a Mac!

MikE

Originally posted by MikE
.......And Kam, you're right I think alot of guys, after awhile, want something more exotic. And if they can solder, go the DIY route like Luther and Billfort. Now that stuff is way cooler than JUST buying a Mac!

MikE

Mike,

You said it buddy! :) Quality D.I.Y. is where you find the truly exotic!

Rob

I don't think they are expensive for what they are. Near totally handbuilt by Americans in upstate NY. Not cheap to do these days. I think their current tube line up is quite reasonable considering. Not a lot of interest to tweakers, minimal breakdown,
customer support second to none. My local dealer charges less
than independants here. I think plenty of people own their "stuff",
not much need to post about this or that though. I can call them on a toll-free line and they will answer intelligent questions on my 45 year old amps! There doesn't seem to be a category for this
for sure. My 2 cents anyway.
Carl

Quality D.I.Y. is where you find the truly exotic! You know it bro! MikE

methinks vintage mcintosh are like the "Harley Davidson" of audio, .... they have been around a long time and quite characteristic in sound and look, ..there may be better, worse or different components out there, but there are no equals,


... and Rob, ..reminds me of a quote i came across the other day
"the state of the art (in audio) cannot be found on the showroom floor"


...
owner of a rusty old mc-2100,

Originally posted by zobsky


... and Rob, ..reminds me of a quote i came across the other day
"the state of the art (in audio) cannot be found on the showroom floor"


...
owner of a rusty old mc-2100,

Boy, I'll fully endorse that statement too!

Rob
"Quality D.I.Y. is where you find the truly exotic!"TM

Frank & company was heavy into military, industrial, professional and home audio when most audio companies were only home audio. He built the home audio to the same spec as the other (or the other way around) and while friends with Saul, Avery, Herman, and the rest, felt that his was the standard to build to. He would not push the envelope into the newest technology that was unproven, compromise the component quality to save a dollar (or lose a contract). In the early year, his stuf got rave reviews, the reviewers agreed he built tanks that would outlast their lifetimes but then complained about the cost. He also, had not liking when a piece was compared to brand x whether he came out ahead or not. Also, back then, companies were souping up review units sending them out and did not expect to receive them back from the reviewer (ever wonder why some reviewer "owned" such great systems on a freelance journalist's fee). He finally withdrew and refused to submit equipment for review and told the mags that an honest review would involve the mag going to a dealer and buying a sealed off the shelf unit to assure that it had not "received special attention". This of course went over like a lead ballon. A few years later a mag did go buy the MA6100 and reviewed it since there had been so many people commenting in the lack of Mc reivews and equated it with the fact Mc was not an advertiser. The mags had to cave into Mc's position if for no other reason than to convince the readers that ad dollars did not dictate what was reviewed or the results. An interesting thing about the 6100 review was that the unit purchased was defective. Sounded great but 1 channel in testing was a few watts down. The reviewer could hear nothing but checked with the dealer who discovered the unit had been serviced by the dealer, repacked and put into stock as new. The servicing was not done correctly. A second unit proved perfect. They published both results suggesting that this was the only time they ever had a bad unit (since no other review mentioned a DOA).. Feedback from the public was that this must happen often and the mag only reported it b/c they wanted to hurt Mc's reputation which is what they set out to do originally but could not. Oh, within a year Mc pulled the dealer's contract. From then on, during Frank's life every Mc reviewed was a purchase from a dealer - one reason why so few.

As for few Mc persons discussing things, most Mc owners are not into the equipment side of the hobby. We want long-lived, reliable excellent sound and want to listen to music. Sort like a Rolls-Royce owner. Got the best but have no idea or interest in what makes it go. We want to listen to music - plain and simple. Most who acquire it see no need or reason to justify it or do equipment rolling. Is there something sonically better - maybe. Is there something technology wise more advanced - maybe. Is there something sexier looking - maybe. But who cares. I've got my Mc and my music.

OK, lets see ,
Saul ...Marantz,
Avery ...Fisher,
Herman ...Who, Munster?
Sorry, I have to bone up on my audio history I guess.
I'll say this for Mcintosh, I just ordered a faceplate for my MA6100, last made in 1979, and it turns out that they still make the part, no problems getting it. I don't think that this happens often for a piece of 20 year old Japanese gear.

Meant to write Harmon as in H-K. I am in the process of getting a new faceplate for my MR77. Considering what it is and the production process, at only about $117, it is a bargain. It will be the only time is a shop since I had preventative maintenance done just before the warranty ran out. There is nothing malfunctioning, just replacing the burnt out bulbs and the multipath tube (hey after 30 years, not bad) at the same time. My C28 has only been in the shop 1 time since new and my MC250 is finally slated to go in for its 1st ever time.

bump :)

Meant to write Harmon as in H-K. I am in the process of getting a new faceplate for my MR77. Considering what it is and the production process, at only about $117, it is a bargain. It will be the only time is a shop since I had preventative maintenance done just before the warranty ran out. There is nothing malfunctioning, just replacing the burnt out bulbs and the multipath tube (hey after 30 years, not bad) at the same time. My C28 has only been in the shop 1 time since new and my MC250 is finally slated to go in for its 1st ever time.
Ha! I thought you mispelled Hermon as in Hermon Hosmer Scott of H.H. Scott fame.

Just had my 30+ year old MR-74 tuner serviced & restored by McIntosh in Binghamton. New Front glass panel, new lamps, new metal dust cover, new panloc rod assembly, new dial cord set, alignment of FM, AM, MPX, new control knob, new 75 ohm jack, cleaned internal components (looks like new!), labor & shipping. Total $400 for virtually a brand new MR 74. Gotta love it. :banana:

Back in the early 70's in Portland there were about 4 stores to buy from. If there were boutique audio companies then they must have been mail order. Hawthorne Stereo was the McIntosh dealer and if you wanted to compare you had three stores on Hawthorne Blvd. so it was just a matter of walking up or down the street a bit to the next place. Only thing that compared to Mac gear then was Marantz. Scott, H-K, Fisher and Dynaco were all considered 2nd tier players. These aren't my words but those of people in two stores who sold different gear. When Paul Klipsch debuted his K-horns in Portland he did so at Hawthorne Stereo using Mac gear. Hawthorne was pretty stuffy back then except for a young guy who took the time to talk to me and explain a few things. I bought a lot of gear from John eventually. I've had my gear for over 30 years and it's still going strong. For the first 12 years it played at least 8-12 hours a day as I had room mates who worked different shifts. In the 30+ years both the C-26 & MC-2505 have been in the shop once. I had to save for a year to buy them but I know I've received a substantial ROI in the years of music I've enjoyed from them. I realize there is gear out there that is better but this is what I own :)

To me owning Mc gear is about owning whats right about american built things and corporate ethics of the old fashioned kind.

The vintage stuff is quite affordable but the new McIntosh products are priced way out of my league. I wish they would come up with new products that were more affordable but that might degrade the brand.

I have always viewed McIntosh as holding a nether, middle ground...something exotic and far too expensive for the Pioneer, Technics, Sansui set, but something a little too common and pedestrian for the ultra-exotic handbuilt set. It holds the allure of more or less mass production (with its well-sorted design) without the stigma of low price for the common man, but is more or less mass production giving up the exclusivity the high-end tweaks insist on to maintain bragging rights. I see it as neither fish nor fowl, but pretty much as an entity unto itself. Call it the threshold to the exotic...

It looks good, it works good, it's built good, it sounds good, therefore it is good!

As for few Mc persons discussing things, most Mc owners are not into the equipment side of the hobby. We want long-lived, reliable excellent sound and want to listen to music. Sort like a Rolls-Royce owner. Got the best but have no idea or interest in what makes it go. We want to listen to music - plain and simple. Most who acquire it see no need or reason to justify it or do equipment rolling. Is there something sonically better - maybe. Is there something technology wise more advanced - maybe. Is there something sexier looking - maybe. But who cares. I've got my Mc and my music.

What Brian said 2 1/2 years ago is certainly echoes how I feel. I might digress only with not being "into" equipment. I've been an audio 'gearhead' ever since high school. At that time, even 30 years ago, I fell in love with McIntosh - but it was completely out of reach for my 17 year old wallet. Other than in magazines, the first McIntosh gear that I actually saw was part of the sound system in a local church. I don't remember which gear it was, but I thought I'd caught a glimpse of a different kind of heaven. The system spoke, to my mind, of unattainable sonic nirvana.

As I type this, I glance at my four McIntosh pieces playing away across the room and smile. I have not the slightest interest in 'equipment rolling' or mixing and matching brands. When I bought my first McIntosh receiver nearly two years ago, it was so clearly sonically distinquishable (and IMO superior) to my then Japanese-made amplifier that, for me, there was no other consideration or upgrade path acceptable. I wanted, and still want, only McIntosh for my electronics, and the only changes I would consider would be upgraded McIntosh gear.

McIntosh is many things to many people, as you can see from the responses. That says a lot. You cannot say that they are any "one thing", other than they are simply an American Classic.

McIntosh is really it's own "category". It's high end, but not just high end - it is basic performance and function executed perfectly. It's much like Listerine, too, in that "it says what it does and it does what it says" - not just as gear, but as a COMPANY (which is rare these days). And it is a slice of American History, when you bought something that performs and lasts - that gives you MONEY'S WORTH, even though it is expensive. It's a GOOD kind of expensive - something that pays dividends over many years time, yet not so expensive that it is unattainable. If somebody REALLY wants a Mac, they can get one.

You don't hear much about McIntosh because most who own Mac aren't here cheering and chiming about how great Mac stuff is. They are simply home enjoying their McIntosh, not even consciously thinking about the gear - just being "comfortable" with it. Like your dad's La-Z-Boy.

Rolls-Royce needs no "puffery". Steinway needs no "puffery". McIntosh needs no "puffery". Stuff like that just sells itself. It doesn't need a salesman to tell you it's good, you KNOW it's good, just from taking a listen. It says what it does, and it does what it says. My kind of brand.