This is my 2nd post here. I had a used 4275 receiver at one time. I was fortunate to get a restored 4100 receiver last year for a fair price. It looks brand new, came w/the original manual and the receipt for the restoration. Unless I win the lottery and get a new one it's the one I'll keep for the duration.
I just purchased a mid-70’s MA6100 and have actually been a little disappointed even after it’s been serviced. Running it through some Klipschs. Surprisingly my Scott 299a sounds better and clearer, where I can just leave the bass and treble flat on everything. Seems like I have to knob-fiddle a fair amount with the MA6100. My dad had a Luxman integrated when I was growing up. What a great amp that was. He regrets selling it to this day and that was almost 40 years ago.
What kind of servicing did the 6100 undergo, and what kind of Klipsch's do you have. Not knowing the specific type of K's, in general a vintage tube amp(and the Scott is a GREAT piece) is going to do better with high efficiency, horn speakers like K's then a solid state amp will. That you have to adjust the tone controls is no big deal...that's what they are there for. But if the 6100 hasn't gone through a thorough bench testing/electronic restoration then that might be part of the problem.
Thanks. I’m using Klipsch RP-8000F’s. I also got the MA6100 from AudioClassics and had to send back to them since the right channel was cutting out. They repaired and sent it back, where although it sounds better, it doesn’t seem as clear as the Scott for some reason on particular music. Also noticed the same on the Polk Audio RT600i I had been using since forever, which are a little less efficient. So I assume it’s had the thorough bench testing, but maybe not.
I would suggest calling and finding out, and relaying your thought/issues with it. They're good people. Could be that it's fine and just not to your taste. I have not heard either of the speakers you mention, although very familiar with Klipsch's heritage line and older Polks. Research on both came up with both good and not so good reports. But it's your ears that count.
No doubt about it. When I sold my MC2000 I got pretty much what I payed for it and could have sold 10 if I'd of had them.
Never had McIntosh equipment, can't afford them. Every system of theirs I've heard in HiFi shows the last 20 years (with theirs or other brands speakers) sounded from fine to great. I love the looks. I like they put EQ in their amps. If I could afford I would go only for their amps. SS and the most powerful. I wouldn't spend any money on their turntables, not my thing aesthetically. I wouldn't buy their SACDp's either, for that kind of money Esoteric would be my choice. I don't like how much they cost but that counts for almost all HiFi equimpment.
Not ones big enough to get that set up LOL, 3 bed semi £320.000, when i see mcintosh speaker scosting £170.000, man thats crazy money ! but i love the MC gear, just bought the MA252 love it, i added a post earlier stating it was a second family car or Mcintosh, im now the proud owner of the 252 lol
They make really nice stuff, but agreed on the overpriced bit. The name and image is largely what you are paying for though. imo their SS integrated sounds no better (but certainly different) than something like a Yamaha A-S1100, and I still prefer other Integrated amps (albeit tube) over them that are $2000 cheaper.
Who says anyone can afford it, mines on a 15 month card, so I've got 15 months of sleepless nights, but I've got the MC, LOL and she's great.
Aesthetically beautiful, but sound quality lacking vs other gear that’s a lot less money. Hi-end price, mid-fi sound.
I don't know about any of the modern stuff but many of the vintage amps, preamps and tuners (both tube and ss) were pretty well made and fairly high quality units for the time. I guess at this point they need to be properly restored to be of service. In general they tend to have a veiled, warm sound character so you have to be into that or you could actually upgrade them to improve the fidelity since there should be plenty of space to add parts etc. Just my take.
Curious, other than you, who says so? I don't own McIntosh gear so I don't have a dog in this hunt. But, other than forums like this, I've never heard claims of how much better other cheaper gear is or that McIntosh would be considered "mid-fi".
As a former New Yorker, I find your opinion a bit humorous. At least what you would pay for Mcintosh items there, would be mostly the same for other Americans. That would seem to be the exception for so many things in Manhattan. All kidding aside, of course you are entitled to your opinion. So help me out. In 1990 , I paid $ 750 for a C 28, fully restored and meeting original specifications , with a 6 Month warranty. I purchased it from an authorized dealer 20 minutes from home, which is also a factory authorized service and repair a shop. I spent $ 250 for one repair. So until the unit was taken out of service on 2018, that was 28 years of daily, trouble free usage. So $ 1000 dollars for 28 years . And yet, when I brought it in for service, I was offered $ 500 on trades towards a new Preamp. That would have reduced my 28 year old expense to $ 500. Just for kicks I put it on Craigslist for $ 300, as is, noting the issues. I had more than 15 responses in a half an hour . I then realized if it was that coveted , maybe I should keep it. So instead of that C 28 purchased in 1990, from a local dealer, who has been there since the 1950s, and the Tech has been there almost as long, where did I go wrong? What should I have done with my $ 750?
Thread is titled "What Are YOUR feelings about McIntosh?", not "justify your opinion/experience re: McIntosh and provide X amount of sources that verify/agree with you" I've owned a lot of gear, including Krell, Sonic Frontiers, Audio Research, VTL, Conrad Johnson, Parasound, etc etc and McIntosh, as well as current Chi-Fi and some Schiit gear too. In this company, McIntosh was bottom of the pile - FOR ME. YMMV.
Again, OP asked/thread title was "What Are YOUR feelings about McIntosh?", not "Post Gear That You Got 2nd Hand That You're Happy With 30 Years Later". We all have our preferences and tastes. Whatever gives you joy, cool with me.
Feelings... OK, got it. However, you made a declarative statement as though it was a fact that Mc was considered mid-fi. Maybe to *you* but not to most. I'm guessing you're not a fan of Rolex watches either...
Actually no I didn't - I said what "I" thought because that's what the OP asked. So "I" said "I" thought McIntosh sounded mid-fi. That's not declarative of anything but my own opinion. And right back at you - saying "most" people don't consider Mc mid-fi - THAT's a declarative statement. Don't know what (Rolex) luxury trinkets for rich show offs have to do with McIntosh?....but it sounds like an appropriate analogy to me (although I wouldn't call that a declarative statement).
A friend of mine, whose wife has a $25,000 Rolex (gift from previous husband), once told me her watch is gorgeous, but a Timex keeps better time.
Although I've had several nice tube setups in my life, I greatly prefer quality solid state amplification. That said, the MA6900 I had driving Vandersteen 3A Signatures in a medium sized room sounded amazingly powerful, but rather dull. It's not a fair comparison based on cost, but I found Boulder to have a lot more resolution and control.