Did McIntosh ever make any bad pieces of stereo equipment?

jeff spicoli

jeff spicoli

AK Subscriber
Subscriber
I should be getting a MC2125 on Saturday and a C29 later next week. I also have a line on a MC30. I was researching McIntosh and that got me to thinking......did McIntosh ever make anything that wasn't good?

You know how some companies are just better than others at the products they make. I'm in the market for a nice cd player and had my eye on a couple from NAD which has some respect in that market. But what about McIntosh?

You never really hear about McIntosh cd players, or McIntosh speakers, or ever McIntosh equalizers as much as the amps and pre amps.
 
jeff spicoli said:
I should be getting a MC2125 on Saturday and a C29 later next week. I also have a line on a MC30. I was researching McIntosh and that got me to thinking......did McIntosh ever make anything that wasn't good?

You know how some companies are just better than others at the products they make. I'm in the market for a nice cd player and had my eye on a couple from NAD which has some respect in that market. But what about McIntosh?

You never really hear about McIntosh cd players, or McIntosh speakers, or ever McIntosh equalizers as much as the amps and pre amps.
Click to expand...

Very subjective topic with no definitive answers.

A few electronic pieces that come to mind as being somewhat less than stellar - MAC 4275/4280 & Stereotech 1200 - receivers. That's not to say they were outright "bad", just not quite up to par with other McIntosh.

To briefly address the last part of your question.

McIntosh made only a handful of standalone EQs - all of which were environmental type, designed for specific applications (usually in conjunction with specific McIntosh speakers) as opposed to program type EQs - more commonly seen & used in hi fi systems.

Some Mc EQs were recommended only for use with McIntosh speakers.

McIntosh speakers seem to have enjoyed only limited success - at least compared to the electronics division. I suspect most new McIntosh speakers were primarily sold to well heeled individuals who wanted all their gear to say McIntosh on it. Much of it is due to simple economics: Most audiophiles felt they could obtain equal or superior loudspeaker performance for significantly less money than the cost of a given Mc speaker.

Much the same probably applies to CD players as well.
 
Last edited:
Yes I agree, I tried to not make it seem like an open ended question. It seems as if McIntosh are the "Cadillac" of stereo equipment but I guess even Cadillac made some duds now and then.

In this community all you hear about McIntosh amps is how good they are. I guess some of it has to do with them being collectible as well?
 
I've had several hundred pieces of McIntosh gear over the years (300? 400?) - amps, preamps, cd players, eqs, speakers, solid state / tube etc. I've never had a Mc piece that I thought was a "lesser than" piece. Some pieces, like the C24 & C26 preamps for example, don't do much for me personally, but that doesn't make them bad.

On the other hand, you won't see me tooling around in a Cadillac Cimarron anytime soon . . .
 
I will throw in my 2 cents: The non-Mc built Escient items like my MS 300. (Was not really Mc stuff and that is the very problem!) First Mc unit in now 45 years of owning Mc stuff that broke on me, amazing record. Otherwise I blow out the dust and change the bulbs for my "heavy maintenence" and I am good to go.
 
damacman said:
I've had several hundred pieces of McIntosh gear over the years (300? 400?) - amps, preamps, cd players, eqs, speakers, solid state / tube etc. I've never had a Mc piece that I thought was a "lesser than" piece. Some pieces, like the C24 & C26 preamps for example, don't do much for me personally, but that doesn't make them bad.

On the other hand, you won't see me tooling around in a Cadillac Cimarron anytime soon . . .
Click to expand...

ha ha I had to Google Cimarron. I've never even heard of Cimarron. My dad always drove a Cadillac and still does.

I've been doing LOTS of reading and it seems as if some companies have very, very good TOTL pieces throughout the years whereas the same company produces lower quality items too.....not saying they are junk. But when people talk about McIntosh they seem to never be a bad word about them and I like that! I like the history and reputation that comes with the company
 
McIntosh speakers were something of a weak link, at least some of the models. But one reason was the intended environment.

I don't think McIntosh expected the speakers to inhabit a typical 12' x 14' room. Even with the equalizers, it seemed like the speakers required a much larger setting before the sound was optimized.

They weren't the only speakers with this problem. But most other manufacturers offered something that would work well in a smaller room.
 
62caddy said:
Very subjective topic with no definitive answers.

A few electronic pieces that come to mind as being somewhat less than stellar - MAC 4275/4280 & Stereotech 1200 - receivers. That's not to say they were outright "bad", just not quite up to par with other McIntosh.

To briefly address the last part of your question.

McIntosh made only a handful of standalone EQs - all of which were environmental type, designed for specific applications (usually in conjunction with specific McIntosh speakers) as opposed to program type EQs - more commonly seen & used in hi fi systems.

Some Mc EQs were recommended only for use with McIntosh speakers.

McIntosh speakers seem to have enjoyed only limited success - at least compared to the electronics division. I suspect most new McIntosh speakers were primarily sold to well heeled individuals who wanted all their gear to say McIntosh on it. Much of it is due to simple economics: Most audiophiles felt they could obtain equal or superior loudspeaker performance for significantly less money than the cost of a given Mc speaker.

Much the same probably applies to CD players as well.
Click to expand...

I'd like to know why the MAC 4280 receiver is sub-par. I bought one for my daughter and it works and looks great.
 
beans said:
I'd like to know why the MAC 4280 receiver is sub-par. I bought one for my daughter and it works and looks great.
Click to expand...

Internals of MAC 4275/4280 were basically mid/upper grade Japanese receivers, that were assembled in Binghamton.

McIntosh in name only, they were not the same caliber as their contemporary Mc receivers, weighed and cost ~ 1/3 less and could not drive 2 ohm speaker loads which the MAC 4100/4200/4300 could.

Not a "bad" receiver per se, just not traditional McIntosh build.

Have owned both MAC 4280 and 4300 and can attest they are not on equal footing by a longshot.
 
Last edited:
reggaenaut said:
Vintage Solid State Pre amps - especially C26 - were mediocre.
Click to expand...

One of the prettiest and worst sounding pieces of gear I have ever had. :smoke:

I'm not a big Mac guy because of that C26. I did have a McIntosh amp of some sort that sounded pretty good to me though. My favorite thing about the stuff is how easy it is to resell. Odd reason I know.
 
Try asking a non-Mcintosh dealer his opinion of the products. :D
 
I loved their Apples,still do:)....Oops...Up here in Canada those BC Macs taste great hot or cold!
 
Destructor said:
Cadillac 4100, a terrible engine put in almost their entire product line for a few years.
Click to expand...

As opposed to the MAC-4100, probably one of the greatest examples of synergy in an all-in-one component ever offered for sale. :D


(*edit - not "serendipity", "synergy"... stupid buzzwords :) *)
 
mrz80 said:
As opposed to the MAC-4100, probably one of the greatest examples of serendipity in an all-in-one component ever offered for sale. :D
Click to expand...

lol!

No more diametrically opposed personifications of quality can be found than that between the HT (hook & tow) 4100 Cadillac and MAC 4100.

They even overlapped production from 1982-1985 too.
 
One question is who is the recognized source of opinion on what is good or bad? I have NEVER read a bad review from High Fidelity or Stereo Review even if the unit didn't have a line cord. Employees at Mac Services? Terry Dewick? Five years of word of mouth through AudioKarma?
 
Interesting thread. When I first saw the original post, I was wondering what would unfold.

It is highly subjective. I've not had any Mac equipment that I'd rate as "bad". All of it was exceptional, IMO.

One funky piece - from a esthetics point of view only - is their MT 10 TurnTable that resembles an Amp, with a black face and a meter for platter speed. After a while, it grew on me. At first, I thought it was an abomination. Now I think it's simply classic Mac and very "Bold" in design. I guess if you hate the design, you'd rate it as a "Bad" piece of Mac Equipment.

mcintoshs_mt10_turntable_f.jpg
 
1700 receiver was not so hot and the previously mentioned c26 preamp looked nice, sounded like crap to me. Same as the 5100 integrated amp. I had two c26's and 2 5100's and i couldn;t get rid of them fast enough
 
Digital stuff…..

Anything "digital." Mc is a follower in this segment for sure. The MS music servers, the new media bridge….they tend to rebadge products and ask an obscene amount of money. They seem to steal (strong word, sorry) core technologies/platforms from other companies then put a "Mc twist" on them.

Look a their MCD players vs. Esoteric. Not even on the same planet.

Do some research and ask your Mc dealers. I think you'll be surprised what is lucking behind that pretty glass face plate.

All this, coming from a guy who has an all Mc system with an MCD301. Don't get me wrong, my 301 is an INCREDIBLE player! After seeing the new Mc media bridge and discussing more in depth with my dealer, there are other/better options I'm considering moving to. :yes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

62caddy
Did McIntosh make two 2125s?
Replies
5
Views
1K
perryinva
perryinva
J
Design A New McIntosh Product
4 5 6
Replies
108
Views
8K
o0OBillO0o
o0OBillO0o
johnnyboy70
Mcintosh 4100
Replies
6
Views
974
sberger
sberger
T
Building new computer sourced, McIntosh powered system
Replies
13
Views
2K
tr@nz
T
L
  • Locked
First time McIntosh buyer, 6 months of frustration [part 2]
2 3
Replies
47
Views
2K
hjames
hjames
Back
Top Bottom