Do true audiophiles own Mcintosh gear

I used to think it was stupid, fashion oriented, history-bound etc etc.... but I have to say, that after working in a dealership that turned me against Mc in the first place - and then transferring to a place that carried it... Wanted to hate it, but couldn't. Their amps sound incredible compared to most other (more expensive) amps I have been around. More open, more detail, bright -never harsh. Like - I can readily pick it out blindfolded. And, they don't get wicked hot. Now, here's where I brag a little, and say that I have measurably above average hearing in the top octave AND I'm quite young for an audiophile. I'm also a season ticket holder for the Boston Symph Orch - quite the reference point.

And, I haven't worked for that dealer (or any others) for several years. ;) This isn't a product plug -or is it? Some (but def not all) of the guys that work at Mc headquarters are rude. So, there; I offset it.

I'm not a huge fan of the feature-laiden, nine-miles of wire preamps that they USED to make; but, I have to admit I actually did use the features even if the preamps were a bit cloudy.

The LS360 is a dream speaker for the price. The others in the line aren't up to it's performance - they're a tad dark. Alas, the LS line is no more. I have not heard the new all metal ones.

I also have to say that their new sources - the 4x CD player and 2x DVDa/SACD players with real-time error correction - make more of a difference in achieving analog sound than any other chassis/damping or upsampling scheme that I've ever heard. Makes technical sense, as optical read omission errors can be horrendous (or so I'm told by friends at MIT).

My fav amp ever is the MC30. Gloriously open/sparkly. Too small for my tastes, tho. Present fav of theirs is the MC501 or MC252 (essentially the same amp) and the MC275. I want one of each :(

SOOOO, yes. I own Mc. And, I am DEF an audiophile.

You don't consider transformer coupling the transistors to keep them in their peak operating range innovative?

Not to pick on Mac, but no. Using output transformers, which have been around on tube amps forever, on transistors which do not need them, is not innovative. It means they are willing to trade away sound quality (transparency) in exchange for stability/reliability.

Tube amplifiers (except OTLs) require output transformers, but they are considered a necessary evil. Fortunately, the vacuum tube is such an inherently transparent and musical device that the final result can still be superb even with the loss that occurs through a good output transformer.

Davemitchell, the results do not support your conclusions. The results are incredible clarity.
Transformers are mixed blessings, of course, but the results speak for themselves. The dual differential truly balanced circuit is also fairly unique, although they are not the first on that one. McCormack does something similar I believe in their DNA 500.

"Do true audiophiles own Mcintosh gear?"

First of all, who has the right to judge whether someone else is a 'true audiophile' (or anything else) for that matter? If you have an all-Mac system (I don't - just an MR85), and are happy with it, IMO, no one else can really fault him/her.

the results do not support your conclusions.

Without getting in to critiquing the "results", my point was that using output transformers is hardly innovative. It's about as retro as you can possibly get.