Since when has McIntosh been considered Hi-End?

[kach22i]

Since when has McIntosh been considered Hi-End?

That was a comment I heard from someone at a recent audio show. My reaction was one of curious amusement because I thought McIntosh invented or defined the Hi-End, at least going back to the mid-1960's.

Where does this snobbery or anti-McIntosh attitude stem from?

I just don't understand it, is it just some competitive spirit at play?

 

[es347]

Due to the preponderance of blue lights perhaps?

 

[Wardsweb]

I LOVE blue lights. I think it stems from a misspent youth being pulled over 27 times in two years. It really wasn't my fault. The Hemi Satellite just wouldn't go slow.

 

[es347]

I disable the meter lts. on my 501s. I find them distracting.

 

[kach22i]

So there is no animosity, I was just being teased?

 

[es347]

I visit a very active MAC forum routinely. The guys that post there are die hard MAC owners and that's fine. I like the MAC gear as well. The thing that I have heard from non MAC owners is that we are more or less "locked in" when it comes to gear purchase due, in my opinion, to the aesthetic. The MAC gear has such a distinctive look, it just doesn't lend itself to mix and match. Obviously there is gear out there that is the sonic equal of MAC but MAC owners just don't go there, again I believe, due to the aesthetic. As a result, there tends to be little experimentation via swapping pieces from other mfrs., a time honored practice amongst audiophiles. In that regard, I suppose in the long run MAC owners, even though they tend to upgrade early and often (within the MAC product catalog), they may actually save money in the long run. How's that for rationalization?

 

[kach22i]

The thing that I have heard from non MAC owners is that we are more or less "locked in" when it comes to gear purchase due, in my opinion, to the aesthetic.

Brand loyalty must certainly cover styling as one aspect of overall appeal.

Perhaps that works both ways, with Non-Mac people being put off by the distinctive look.

Perhaps the best example of taking a good thing too far would be this:
http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/products/mcintosh-mt10-turntable.asp

No I have not heard it, yes I should before making comments but it does illicit a reaction based on looks alone.

When I was at a McIntosh dealer recently, up on the shelf was a black glass display box with the name McIntosh on the front, I think you could plug it in and back-light it. This sort of novety item with no purpose other than a prop got my attention. God help me I wanted one.

 

[Bulldogger]

opinion, to the aesthetic. The MAC gear has such a distinctive look, it just doesn't lend itself to mix and match. Obviously there is gear out there that is the sonic equal of MAC but MAC owners just don't go there, again I believe, due to the aesthetic. As a result, there tends to be little experimentation via swapping pieces from other mfrs., a time honored practice amongst audiophiles. In that regard, I suppose in the long run MAC owners, even though they tend to upgrade early and often (within the MAC product catalog), they may actually save money in the long run. How's that for rationalization?

I thought about it then I though about Audio Research and Krell.Neither Mcintosh,Audio Research or Krell share the same aesthetics. I guess could also apply this logic to Audio Research and Krell as well? I know my wife likes the look of Mcintosh. She says it, the MC501s, look like art and she does not really care much for the "look" of any of my gear. My previous amp was known as the big black thang. It got that name because I always took it with me for hurricane evacuations and my wife wanted to know if I was bringing the big black thang. Funny, my wife and her family ride in her car when we evacuate. No one can ride with me because I have a Jeep Grand Cherokee and the back seats are down with luggage, and of course my 5 Mcintosh amp! She knows what Mcintosh amps are and calls them by name. But damn, how can she miss the BIG GREEN ILLUMINATED letters?!

 

[kach22i]

Reminds me of what my audio buddy Bruce once said. Women and children all know two makes of automobiles, Ferrari and Porsche.

Maybe McIntosh needs better product placement in the movies.

 

[nsgarch]

I have heard from non MAC owners is that we are more or less "locked in" when it comes to gear purchase due, in my opinion, to the aesthetic. The MAC gear has such a distinctive look, it just doesn't lend itself to mix and match. Obviously there is gear out there that is the sonic equal of MAC but MAC owners just don't go there, again I believe, due to the aesthetic.

That's a very thoughtful take on the subject of McIntosh obsessive/compulsive anal retentive behaviour And probably true in many cases. Thank God my MC275 doesn't have blue lights!

From 1951 -- 1961 all Mac stuff was pretty industrial looking. Starting in 1957 (with the MR55 AM/FM mono tuner) glass was introduced (because tuners need dials!) but the black/gold/green motif was quite reserved -- no more racy than Marantz or Fischer of that era. But in the late 60's they came up with the split front panel -- black glass on the top half and champagne gold lower half. It was a bold look and it wasn't so much that it didn't go with other equipment, but that it called so much attention to itself: Look at ME!! And so it's been with McIntosh ever since -- especially the "big green meters" thing (which started in 1984) and the ALL black glass front panels which started about 10 years later.

When I look at McIntosh equipment today, I think of late 50's design when there were fins on cars And the biggest and most expensive -- the Cadillac and the Chrysler Imperial had the BIGGEST FINS! (Lincoln, not so much ;--) McIntosh is definitely "Hi-End" quality. It's just that there's nothing innovative about their circuit design(s); and do we really need solid state amps with output transformers??? They just keep loading their equipment up with more and more 'features' which do little or nothing to improve performance. And while the current MC275 tube amp (ca. 1961!) is one of the best buys in audio (even after the $1000 price increase), with most all of their other gear, I think you can do as well for less money; or better for the same money. New McIntosh products are not Hummer-industrial, or Land Rover-evolved, or Porsche Cayenne-refined. Most McIntosh equipment today reminds me more of Cadillac Escalades: big, overblown, black, ponderous, intimidating monsters -- best suited for rappers, and men with big bank accounts and small penises

 

[MylesBAstor]

That's a very thoughtful take on the subject of McIntosh obsessive/compulsive anal retentive behaviour And probably true in many cases. Thank God my MC275 doesn't have blue lights!

From 1951 -- 1961 all Mac stuff was pretty industrial looking. Starting in 1957 (with the MR55 AM/FM mono tuner) glass was introduced (because tuners need dials!) but the black/gold/green motif was quite reserved -- no more racy than Marantz or Fischer of that era. But in the late 60's they came up with the split front panel -- black glass on the top half and champagne gold lower half. It was a bold look and it wasn't so much that it didn't go with other equipment, but that it called so much attention to itself: Look at ME!! And so it's been with McIntosh ever since -- especially the "big green meters" thing (which started in 1984) and the ALL black glass front panels which started about 10 years later.

When I look at McIntosh equipment today, I think of late 50's design when there were fins on cars And the biggest and most expensive -- the Cadillac and the Chrysler Imperial had the BIGGEST FINS! (Lincoln, not so much ;--) McIntosh is definitely "Hi-End" quality. It's just that there's nothing innovative about their circuit design(s); and do we really need solid state amps with output transformers??? They just keep loading their equipment up with more and more 'features' which do little or nothing to improve performance. And while the current MC275 tube amp (ca. 1961!) is one of the best buys in audio (even after the $1000 price increase), with most all of their other gear, I think you can do as well for less money; or better for the same money. New McIntosh products are not Hummer-industrial, or Land Rover-evolved, or Porsche Cayenne-refined. Most McIntosh equipment today reminds me more of Cadillac Escalades: big, overblown, black, ponderous, intimidating monsters -- best suited for rappers, and men with big bank accounts and small penises

Hey I know that Chrysler Imperial! My parents had a 56 Imperial with the push button automatic drive selector, plastic seat covers and 354 cu inch hemi-head, 4 barrel carb engine (dragsters used to take that engine and bore it out!). Believe it or not, that Imperial could get up to 26 mpg on the hwy!

But OTOH, they also had two Packards-one of which being the horrible '57 Clipper. It was so technologically advanced that nothing worked. The transmission broke down all the time. The torsion bar suspension rarely worked. I remember on more than one occassion, only being able to drive the car in reverse since drive didn't work

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

best suited for rappers, and men with big bank accounts and small penises

I don't have a big bank account, so I guess I'm ok!

John

 

[apanton1952]

I don't have a big bank account, so I guess I'm ok!

John

I don't rap either...

 

[JackD201]

Reminds me of what my audio buddy Bruce once said. Women and children all know two makes of automobiles, Ferrari and Porsche.

Maybe McIntosh needs better product placement in the movies.

I think McIntosh and Martin Logan (Friends, The Italian Job) have been spotted in movies and TV being used by A-list actors more than any other marks

SOTA and Duevel are aggressive on House. SOTA even gets mentioned in the credits.

Here's a list of MACs in film from Roger Russel's website:

9 1/2 Weeks (1986) starring Mickey Rourke and Kim Basinger. MC2155 closeup of one meter and countdown numbers.

As Good As It Gets (1997) starring Jack Nicholson and Helen Hunt

What Lies Beneath (2000) Harrison Ford and Michelle Pfeiffer

High Fidelity (2000) John Cusack and Stephen Frears

The Grateful Dead movie

Pillow Talk (1960) Doris Day and Rock Hudson. C-8 preamp. Can only be seen in the wide screen version.

Stepford Wives (remake) Nicole Kidman. MC2000 can be seen.

The Departed (2006) Jack Nicholson, Matt Damon and Leonard DeCaprio

Executive Action (1973) Burt Lancaster and Robert Ryan. MX110

 

[apanton1952]

ML's in Be Cool - Scripts I think but can't recall perfectly.

 

[markc2]

One of the best systems I had ever heard was when I was a around 20. The dealer took his time and showed me around and explained various components to me. We went into the all Mcintosh room and it was just THERE. Not ethereal, not dainty, not crystalline. Just Bruce Springsteen standing in front of me singing, what more could one ask for. So after going to some high end shops around Austin, I stumbled into Mcintosh again. They had 2x275's and they sounded awesome, and I took my bonus from work and it and I parted ways, and along came 1 mc275V.

I really like EAR, Shindo, MHDT labs,NAGRA, Audio Note and others, Finally got to hear Mercury Vapor tubes, you want blue, that's the way to go.

Mark

 

[MC352]

One of the best systems I had ever heard was when I was a around 20. The dealer took his time and showed me around and explained various components to me. We went into the all Mcintosh room and it was just THERE. Not ethereal, not dainty, not crystalline. Just Bruce Springsteen standing in front of me singing, what more could one ask for. So after going to some high end shops around Austin, I stumbled into Mcintosh again. They had 2x275's and they sounded awesome, and I took my bonus from work and it and I parted ways, and along came 1 mc275V.

I really like EAR, Shindo, MHDT labs,NAGRA, Audio Note and others, Finally got to hear Mercury Vapor tubes, you want blue, that's the way to go.

Mark

I also heard McIntosh at a friends house years ago, and when I had some money, I got some used gear. No need to be a rich rapper to get nice McIntosh gear. Not everyone is into the retro look, but if you buy audio gear on looks alone, then well you're probably not really into audio gear.
To each his or her own in looks and sound.

 

[assessor43]

Sometimes I think there earlier tube amps may be their best efforts. The MC30, MC240, and MC275 are pretty decent IMO.

 

[microstrip]

I have owned some McIntosh equipment in the past , including the MC275 and later a C2200 / MC2102 pre and power amplifier. Surely true high-end anywhere in the world, IMHO.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

I have owned some McIntosh equipment in the past , including the MC275 and later a C2200 / MC2102 pre and power amplifier. Surely true high-end anywhere in the world, IMHO.

Really? Wow. I also owned the MC275 and C2300 (rather than C2200). Thought it was utterly awful. Probably the muddiest and low resolution amp / pre combination I ever owned by a large margin. That was with very efficient speakers too.