McIntosh -- good for show, not for sound, says dealer

What are you talking about laoman? It doesn't need to be in any quotes at all. Putting the word done in italics is perfectly fine.

I think it is clear laoman just despises Americans and our great iconic brands.

I'm not sure that anyone can conclude that any brand of audio equipment is all bad, or all good. It appears to me, that how great a particular amp or set of speakers sounds, is not absolute with all amps or speakers.

It seems that how good any amp sounds, depends on how well it mates and synergizes electronically with a particular set of speakers, compared to others. How the design, and how much current, or voltage, is produced by the amp, the damping factor, the impedance, etc., etc. compared to what is required by the design of the speakers is far more relevant to how one combination sounds compared to the range of alternatives, than the brands of those combinations.

It does not seem that one can generalize that one brand amp, or another, will sound great with all types and brands of speakers – because they don't. I've found that true with the variety of amps and speakers that I have had.

I recently decided to try Harbeth speakers – the 30.1's and the 40.2's – which I have. And, I found that several of the amps I had, did not seem to drive them to their potential – the Harbeths didn't have the dynamics and clarity, and the mids and bass were not as controlled as, I had heard them present with other amps – specifically, the Hegel amps. Or, the McIntosh MA252 or MA352, which are two newer amps by McIntosh, which are tube / SS hybrids. Both the Hegel amps and the MA252 / MA352 amps provide the utmost in bass control, dynamics and clarity with both the 30.1's and 40.2's. I got the Hegel HA590 integrated SS amp to drive them, which drive the Harbeths to their full potential. I would not have kept the Harbeths, had I not found the amps that can properly drive them.

It can be a long, frustrating and costly journey to find amps and speakers that match well and synergize to produce their optimum sound quality – which is why you might rely on the manufacturers to provide that guidance. Harbeth's designer makes clear that selected SS amps drive his speakers to their full potential – which is why he demos them with the Hegel amps. Which is also why I decided to get the Hegel H590 for them. But, I often think of how great they also sound with the McIntosh MA252 and MA352, and perhaps, in some aspects even better - that tube preamp stage may add a special aspect to their sound, that the Hegel amps may not.

Why I was so impressed with the Harbeths:

Keith Don’t Go, Harbeth 30.1 + Hegel H300 - YouTube

Harbeth 30.1 & McIntosh MA-252 #1 - YouTube

Just my recent relevant experience.

@bassdude

excellent, thoughtful post

i too have found over the years that it is a smart move to determine what amplification is used by one’s favorite speaker maker for development and at demonstrations/shows, and then at least audition, if not outright emulate that setup

stewart tyler’s using arc vt series tube amps for voicing his proac response series

alan shaw using hegel 360/390 for his harbeths

spencer hughes and terry miles using quad 66 and audiolab 8200 monoblocks developing spendor classic spendors

more recently, clayton shaw using lta zotl tube amps for his spatial sapphires

wendell diller using bryston, now pass labs for his maggies

focal with naim, devore with line magnetic...and so on... not to say these are the only ones that work well, but it gives precious insight into what amps, or the nature of amps, that the makers themselves think will coax the best sound from their speakers

Took a couple days off social media. I see things are still going.

Reviewing the video and this thread, it’s clear that the video is not really about McIntosh. Jay (who made his own video about McInstosh) missed the what I think is the main point in OCD’s video. What is that point? Well, he’s advising people about how to sort out what to buy.

He begins by sorting audiophiles into two exclusive groups.

His first distinction, quoting the video here, is this "split:":

"You’re either a guy for display or you’re a guy for sonic and you don’t care about display." He continues, "Are you someone who you want something that visually is striking so that when people come over to your place to listen they’re visually arrested by the look of your rig and they’re awestruck by how grandiose it is okay or how beautiful it is or how amazing it is?"

If you’re about how things look, he has an example:

A "perfect example [is] macintosh, okay. You guys know that it’s a brand I don’t really like because I just don’t think it sounds that good; I think it’s overpriced."

And people who like looks are wowed by it. Ok, so it just seems at this point like one person’s opinion.

But, then he makes the sweeping claim:

"For people that are in hi-fi, we look at it and we’re like ‘Oh cute little green LED, that’s pretty kitschy,’ you know; ‘Oh that’s nice,’ you know. But I get where the market segment is -- it’s [McIntosh] not really...for the audiophile. I think macintosh is for the person that wants to *show* that they’re an audiophile; they want people to *recognize* them *as* an audiophile through a visual cue -- which means people that don’t know crap about hi-fi, okay? Because people that really know about hi-fi look at McIntosh -- the ones that [are] real audiophiles -- we know it doesn’t sound that good."

Who is McIntosh for, then? McIntosh is good, he says,

"for people that don’t really know, okay? For people that...are in their infancy of their hi-fi that aren’t real audiophiles but they’ve just started hi-fi; they’re going to be impressed because they know how much that [McIntosh gear] costs; the first level of person has no idea what it even is -- they’re going to be blown away by how it looks [but in fact] they have no clue."

But this is not just about McIntosh hate. That’s too simple. It’s about creating two categories — those who are fooled by looks and don’t understand what good sound is, and those who manage to get past superficial looks (and price). This is a video for people who are confused and need guidance. They want to hear good sound and they need a guru. This categorization is the first lesson being offered by this guru. It’s not a question of one internet dude's opinion. He is arguing for a fundamental dualism — looks vs. sounds. And those who accept that dualism will trust the guy who taught it to them. (And maybe buy his gear.)

This is also not just about McIntosh. It’s an Us-Them rhetoric, and all such rhetoric needs examples. McIntosh is just the first and easiest example to support the dubitable claim that there are (only) two kinds of audiophiles (the visually-mesmerized and the sonically-enlightened.) But then he adds in other brands. He mentions Focal,Wilson, Magico, too. About these brands he says,

"Man, they have the visual nailed, but they do not have the audio nailed." They are among, he says, "these visual brands for people that have elegant homes" filled with people where, "you’re the big man you know sitting in front of this gorgeous thing."

This is why this video is interesting (to me). It’s not about McIntosh at all. It’s about whether there are two kinds of audiophiles, whether looks and sonics are mutually exclusive, and (at the meta-level) whether dealers who advance these kinds of characterization about these dilemmas are operating in service of the hobby or just in service of their wedge into the business of the hobby.