Is McIntosh a stepping stone into HI/FI?

07-05-11: Tzh21y
The mc275 is slower, but I love it. Heck it is a tube amp! I could probably say that it is slow, rounded, yes, midrange beauty, yess, colored, maybe a little, and I think I am going to put another record on right now. An audiophile friend said that I am listening to more music than anyone else he knows.

I don't know which generation MC275 you have, but the current v3 has good bandwidth and risetime even by today's standards. The Stereophile review and measurements indicate that its -3dB bandwidth point is 91Khz, and the rise times of its square wave responses correspond to that and are very precise and square. Given that, the treble rolloff you perceive may simply be its uncommon smoothness, and the reason you play so much music through it is because it conveys more of the sonic and emotional cues of live music including that transparent, seamless tube midrange combined with commendable speed, clarity, and frequency extension with no ringing, harshness, or overshoot.

It is a great amp for the money. That is very hard to argue.

It is a steal for the money, if you love music.

At about $4.5K new, indeed, what's not to like? If I had the coin I'd have one in a heartbeat.

I have owned equipment from McIntosh and a few other manufacturers (Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, McCormack, Bryston, Cary, Manley, to name a few). I found the McIntosh gear to be very reliable, good sounding, and had a great re-sale value. If it was a stepping stone, then I would sometimes like to take a step back, and have the Mac gear I sold back again. One can always find fault with anything, but I definitely don't think it is a stepping stone. In fact I respect McIntosh for being one of the few companies that has stood by their values and has continued to make quality gear here in the US.

I've found that MAC electronics match up with any speaker you can throw at them. Other amps having higher resolution?...that's what everyone seems to say but the many A/B comparisons I have witnessed hasn't proven that. You can spend more for sure but it's way past the law of diminishing returns.

07-15-11: Es347
I've found that MAC electronics match up with any speaker you can throw at them. Other amps having higher resolution?...that's what everyone seems to say but the many A/B comparisons I have witnessed hasn't proven that.

I think Mac equipment in general is deceptively resolving because it is so uncommonly smooth. Real music doesn't have a harsh or electronic edge, or a rising treble to beat you over the head with detail. If you listen to a treble-hyped stereo all the time, you'll be shocked at how "rolled off" the treble sounds at a live symphony concert, even if you're in the first few rows. Macintosh's waveforms and tonal balance are more in keeping with live acoustic music.

If you have resolution plus smoothness, you have refinement.

I am on my second real system and just like 15yrs ago I looked into the other brands and ended up with MC. With the MC 3-4 hrs. nightly w/out fatigue, if I could stay up later it would be more. Even my dog likes it as he sits in the chair next to me. Not switching to brand "x" any time soon.