Automotive Analogies

Try to describe sound. Its a part your trying to relate to a car. You can't touch it, taste it, smell it, see it and only rarely feel it.

The analogy would probably be sound to motion, not sound to an automobile.
Motion is the primary purpose of an automobile just as sound is of audio equipment.
 
Lets see, a MC 240 cost $288.00 new. Try to find a pristine example fully restored for less than $5000.00. And yes Mac is a limited production line compared to Yamaha,Pioneer and other oriental products. 193 MC 3500's is not a large number. Even 10,000+ C-22 is not that big a number. Wonder how many C-22 MK III they will build, A thousand? more?
 
Most European cars are just well.............cars! Much of a muchness. They kind of look the same and usually start when you want them to.
Mercs and Audis are generally nice cars - well built and comfy to drive.
Most Jap cars fall into the 1st category with the added benefit that they break down less.
US muscle cars are great in a straight line, but don't like going round corners.

Jags and Porsches are drivers cars.

I like hifi that was designed in the U.K. but made in Japan. Think......Drivers cars that don't breakdown very often :banana:
 
Buick's changed too much likewise. Think Bentley or Rolls-Royce.

I know where your coming from but I’m too hung up on the geography of things. Bentley and Roll Royce would make me think Wilson Benesch. Cadillac and McIntosh both represent the best of what the USA offers, especially by today’s standards, Cadillac of the 70’s 80’s wasn’t much more than a pimped out Chevrolet with some fancy bits tacked on. I’m not too concerned about history of a product...it’s today that matters to me
 
I know where your coming from but I’m too hung up on the geography of things. Bentley and Roll Royce would make me think Wilson Benesch. Cadillac and McIntosh both represent the best of what the USA offers, especially by today’s standards, Cadillac of the 70’s 80’s wasn’t much more than a pimped out Chevrolet with some fancy bits tacked on. I’m not too concerned about history of a product...it’s today that matters to me

I not only care about the history of my gear, I care about it's engineering, it's sound quality, it's build, and how it's supported. I care about it's heritage. McIntosh is the only pioneering audio company which still builds their gear at the same level of quality today. I have seen companies come and go in the business. McIntosh has been a constant.
 
Another kind of automotive analogy is that there's always some ne plus ultra, TOTL model that (almost) everyone lusts after, even though it may not actually be the best car/component for them. We have this with certain car brands--there are some crazy-expensive TOTL models that people shell out the big bucks for, but which are very expensive to maintain and in some ways not as worthy as less expensive models. Certain V12 models vs the V8s in the same lineup, for example, don't handle as well, cost much more to keep up, and in some cases are even slower since the engines weigh so much.

Anyway this is what got me thinking.
http://audiokarma.org/forums/index....chase-opportunity.804539/page-2#post-11204054

And I would no longer compare Mac with Rolls. It's more like Rolls, and Caddy, and Harley all rolled up into one, and maybe some Morgan too since their designs have often been constant (aesthetically) over the years.
 
B&W Tweeters and 50s Imperial "Gunsight" Taillights

index.php

index.php
 
Both McIntosh and Cadillac are the oldest and longest-in-continuous-production American manufacturers within each of their respective fields

What if GM decided to go into higher-end audio? Would their products sell under the Macillac brand? :thumbsup:

Dave
 
To the original question. I see late 70s Pioneer receivers as 1970 Buick GS 455 Stage1. Acceptable refinement with brutal factory power for the time. Had that and 70 sixpack Superbee at the same time. Buick was faster.
 
To the original question. I see late 70s Pioneer receivers as 1970 Buick GS 455 Stage1. Acceptable refinement with brutal factory power for the time. Had that and 70 sixpack Superbee at the same time. Buick was faster.
I had a 70 six pack Superbee but was missing the six pack.This was in the mid 80s.Always wanted that Buick but even in the mid 80s it was a special and desirable meaning pricey.I also see the analogy of the totl 70s receivers to the totl musclecars of the late 60s early 70s.
 
I had a 70 six pack Superbee but was missing the six pack.This was in the mid 80s.Always wanted that Buick but even in the mid 80s it was a special and desirable meaning pricey.I also see the analogy of the totl 70s receivers to the totl musclecars of the late 60s early 70s.
Got both in late 70s for $1500 each, clean. Six pack was 3.91, GS was 3.73. Both auto, stock and tuned right. Wanted the nasty six pack to be faster. But no, it just wasn't. My W30, SS and Judge followed the two. My AMX was a real pest for all of them. Rust got them all by 99. I'd do it the same all over.
 
Jags and Porsches are drivers cars.

Haven't seen a Jag in nearly 50-years that I would consider a driver's car. I sold Porsche for 20-years, alongside BMW, and always preferred the driving dynamics of the BMW. Never was a Porsche that I could use for taking my kids to school and the same day enjoy on the race-track but I did enjoy nearly ever 911 over those 20-years. No so much the VW-based 924, etc.

I can cite many examples of cases where a Porsche owner had to transition to a BMW for reasons of accommodation and quickly came back to me stating how their M3 or M4 surprised them by being as fast, better handling, and more fun than the Porsche it replaced. I never tell them that, as devoted as Porschephiles are. They'd have called me a liar. But it's interesting to see them arrive at that epiphany themselves.

And, of course, Rolls Royce is now part of the BMW Group.

I'd call my BMW 2002tii the JBL L96 of the car world—very little it doesn't do well, and without bankrupting the owner or being more flash than substance. Hyper-expensive systems like Magico or diamond-encrusted B&Ws I'd have to consider the Maybach's of the auto world. All flash with a basis in function.

I'd make McIntosh the Lexus of the audio world for those who don't take chances, prefer living-room sound to live sound, and don't demand real handling or performance—particularly if you include the Mac speaker lines. Cadillac works, too. I'm a JBL guy and find my 4345s can do anything well and play any music—loud, soft, or anywhere in-between. I guess that's why I'm a JBL guy and a BMW guy. I know there are others here just like me!
 
Last edited:
Speakers with many different drivers ~ Auto transmissions with many different speeds
(I think they're up to 10 now?) Pros and Cons to both, of course, as with much else.

infinity-kappa-nine.JPG
 
I have one main auto/audio analogy.

Horsepower to watts. It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

...that also applies to money and oxygen.

BTW, I had a '64 Jaguar 3.8S. I would not consider that a drivers car but it was beeyoootiful and the ladies loved it.

64 jag 3.8  S.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom