McIntosh, 60 years on!

The new C22 and MC75

(Credit: McIntosh Labs)

Apple was founded in 1976; McIntosh Laboratories goes all the way back to 1949.

Computers get old really fast, while TVs age a bit more gracefully. But there's not much of a collectors market for old TVs or computers, at least by people who use them on a daily basis. Face it: computers, iPods, and TVs are disposable technology, while the useful working life of great audio designs is measured in decades. Many decades. Case in point: McIntosh's classic designs from the 1960s still fetch big dollars. Which is why buying really good stuff makes sense.

I doubt Apple will be celebrating the 60th anniversary of the Apple II in 2037 with a commemorative reissue, and I can't imagine Sony announcing plans to offer Trinitron CRT TVs anytime soon. Audiophiles still covet classic tube and solid-state electronics, and pay big bucks for good condition originals.

Which brings us to McIntosh's 60th anniversary limited-edition reissues of its legendary amplifiers, the 75-watt MC75 monoblock tube amplifier (modeled after the original 1961 version) and the C22 stereo preamplifier (originally introduced in 1962).

Both components have been updated for use in today's modern home-entertainment universe, and only 120 sets of the classic system will be available in North America, with a suggested retail price of $15,000. They will sell out, so if you're interested, act now.

Sure, $15,000 is a lot of money, but if it lasts 60 years, that works out to be $250 a year!

Introduced in 1962, the McIntosh C22 Tube Preamplifier ushered in the era of the audio preamp as the "control center." The new one isn't a strict duplicate of the original; the C22 now features higher tolerance parts and superior manufacturing methods. The preamp now comes with a remote control.

McIntosh electronics are still designed and manufactured at the company's Binghamton, N.Y., headquarters. Same as it ever was.

[feverboy777]

I'm cutting off my right nut to get one. :) Wow .... a C22 w/remote, this is a dream come true. I wonder if MacIntosh would take my first female child in exchange :) :) :)

[one_flat_monkey]

the 250 bucks a year is disingenuous. no tube is going to last 60 years. i don't know how long the tubes for a Macintosh 75 will last, but that has to be factored into the cost. the two 6550s are about 80 bucks each and there are 3 12AX7s ( at around ten bucks a pop ). probably, if you are running the amp every day for 3-4 hours, your power tubes should be replaced at least once every 2-3 years. ultimately that probably averages out to about $300 bucks a year, but the prices will increase over time.

[kcar27]

So, the $15K price tag means that receiver technology hasn't really improved in 45+ years? Right?

Or maybe it means that there are still too many buyers who automatically equate price with quality. Sad.

[make_or_break]

Total production of 120 units and you're complaining about the $15k price tag???

[homercles82]

Apple users think this way.

[troyoverton]

Sir, it appears most likely that you have never owned any McIntosh gear.

[moretroops]

Wow that's beautiful.

$15k for a functional piece of art doesn't sound so crazy - assuming you have the money (which I don't).

[jskrenes]

I wonder if you blind-tested people if they could tell the difference. Obviously if I bought it, it would sound better than your stereo, because *I* just spent *15K* on my new stereo system, so I'm biased (no tube-related pun intended) toward my system. But in a double-blind test, I wonder if people would know the difference and what they would prefer...

[moretroops]

Seriously? If you can't tell the difference bw that and a $1000 Sony system then you're either not trying or deaf.

[make_or_break]

If you can't tell the difference between a tube setup and that solid-state crapola--regardless of price--then there's NO help for your ears.

[troyoverton]

Yes, its worth every penny. EVERY penny.

[soundman45]

Let me just say McIntosh has always made great looking and sounding stuff but I'd love to see an actual breakdown of what it actually costs to produce this product and market it. I'm sure the profit margin is sick.

[one_flat_monkey]

i'm going to take a wild stab and guess that it costs around 3K to make this amp. the pre-amp, probably another $1500, so the mark-up is probably around 100%.

about the sound of amps: when i purchased a pair of Magnepan 1.4s several years ago ( $1K ), they were powered by a Audio Research Classic 60 amp, which in 1992 was around $3250, more money than i had available to spend on an amp. the combination of the amp and the speakers was magical. i think the preamp was an AR SP-10, which was a $2K piece of gear, IIRC. the amp that i ended up with was PS Audio 200C and a PS Audio preamp. Good, but not great.

[Jeffs386]

its a bargain and will only appreciate in value
I have an original C22 along with an MC240 amplifier and MR71 tuner that I will keep until I die

[Tenorsaw]

Please read this:

http://tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/rcrules.htm

I'm not denying McIntosh's quality, but some people really believe in snake oil with their "warm sounding" tube amps.

[engfant]

There is a CLEAR difference in tube vs transister JUST AS there is a clear difference in analog vs digital.

If you don't or can't hear or understand the difference then you win. 128kb MP3s are best for you.

[Tenorsaw]

Engfant, you clearly don't understand the point I was making.

Anyway, if your opinion is that strong, you should go and take the challenge I posted the link for. For the record, no one has won the $10,000 challenge. He will even let you bring your "warm sounding" tube amplifier.

[jscott418]

The problem lately is that people believe that any digital is better then analog. As any audiophile will tell you that's not true. We have compressed and messed with digital so much that it can be worse then any analog recording. I actually think we are at a standstill or even in decline with audio quality.
Many consumer electronics are more about number of inputs and outputs and not quality of audio.
The visual element has overtaken the sound. Sorry to say many younger people would not know good sound if they heard it.

[alegr]

The problem with many audiophiles is that they believe that any digital is worse than analog.

[one_flat_monkey]

the reason may be that they don't understand that all conversions from analog to digital require some loss of information, however minimal. obviously, over any considerable period of time, analog reproduction will add some information that was not in the original source, and there will be some information loss, as well, but it's inherently different from the loss that occurs in the conversion.

[alegr]

OFM,

However analog-digital-analog path's "loss of information" would be, it's (with modern technology) MUCH MUCH less than THD and noise in an analog magnetic tape or (God forbid) in LP recording.

[tipoo_]

Heh, we still have a working Sony Trinitron. I doubt our new 50 inch LCD HDTV will last as long as the Trinitron did.

[Sugith1]

As with all products there's the high end and the low end. You can buy a Honda Fit or a Rolls Royce. They'll both get you where you need to go. You can buy a Big Mac anywhere or eat at Mario Batali's B and B restaurant at the Venetian in Vegas. They'll both fill you up.

If you can't hear the difference, then don't bother spending the money. No harm no foul.

Most of us who CAN hear the difference but can't afford the 15 large are the ones who need to take a tranq. It's the desperate desire to be "right" that causes problems.

Still have my C20 that I bought in the early 70's used for $175. Still works for my turntable.
A purist would have new capacitors put in and redo everything etc. for a bunch of money, but I just keep listening.
I listen mostly to digital stuff including quite a bit of mp3's, but I still like to listen to vinyl with the tupe preamp and transitor power amp (SAE).
However, my speakers aren't the the best by a long shot and I probabley can't tell the difference on most stuff.
What seems to be different these days is some folks in the production line seem to settle for good enough instead of the best possible, such as highly compressed audio vs. FLAC or other lossless stuff.
NIN always gives you a choice of the quality you wish to have is an example of someone who thinks about quality.