-
Feeling lucky? Check out the AK 24th Anniversary Giveaway thread and join in the fun!
new look for McIntosh?
- Thread starter jeremyjustic
- Start date
mcintoshmagic
Active Member
DonBattles
Well-Known Member
Nothing wrong with a little change. But when you have such a long history with styling that's been consistent than making such a drastic design change seems like a bold (read bad) idea. And perhaps in person the visual appeal might be much different, but overall I really don't care for it.
One of the most fundamental characteristics of McIntosh's philosophy was that of minimal styling changes for two reasons: As Charlie Randall put it, (not an exact quote) "You can upgrade components of your system and their styling will be compatible with older components that you wish to keep." And 2: More energy/resource can be devoted to genuine improvements/refinements where it counts rather being diverted to costs associated with restyling every several years. It is this basic philosophy that not only sets McIntosh apart from many other mass marketed products but has resulted in McIntosh products enjoying among the highest resale values of any major electronics manufacturer. The more I reflect upon this "new look", I feel McIntosh is tampering with one the most basic elements of its success. For many years, McIntosh's products have been labled as looking "old fashioned" in some quarters and I believe that it is McIntosh's refusal to defer to that pressure has contributed to the respect it has enjoyed for so many years.
Last edited:
Brian
An Old Geezer
Guess a key question for Mc would be whether their sales and market share was suffering from maintaining the classic look with only minor changes with each generation. I wonder if this question arose when Mc went to the glass panel from the 1/2 glass and before it the all metal panel.
That's a good question. The thing is that the McIntosh look as we now know it has been entrenched for over 40 years and has become a product signature. Hitherto, no single particular look had really been in use by Mc (or for that matter, anyone else) for anywhere near that duration. It's a difficult question with no easy answers.
Last edited:
mhardy6647
Lunatic Member
I think one of the great examples of balancing a company's heritage with its present and future is Nikon. I love the fact that my nice, modern Nikon DSLR can be used with classic Nikon lenses (of course, with some limitations) - Nikon's taken pains not to obsolete its legacy (and also not to alienate its customer base). It has helped keep me, and my son, as loyal Nikon customers (that, and, of course, the great quality and value of their optical products).
I think that's an excellent philosophy for new product development. The compatibility of the new with the old helps to produce a "halo" effect for all of a company's products. Radical changes will often translate to increased sales initially, but often can result in "dilluting" all their products over time. It is as if all prior offerings are dismissed as junk by implication as compared to the new.
Last edited:
mhardy6647
Lunatic Member
McIntosh gets credit for (still) building the MC275. No implication that it was - or perhaps ever will be - obsolete as a fine reproducer of sound (with or without LEDs).
I actually think that the MC275 is one of the few bargains in modern hifi.
I actually think that the MC275 is one of the few bargains in modern hifi.
I personally believe that most of the bashers who actually had the money to afford Mcintosh would buy it.
Brian
An Old Geezer
Nice to know thee is someone who knows our minds. It is sentiments like yours in marketing departments that finally wake up to their errors in judgement; about a day or so after their company declares bankruptcy. We who do not care for the newest designs are not bashing the product but simply voicing an opinion that we prefer an older generation looking design. I seriously doubt it will deter any of us who want to buy a new unit. I personally never cared for led meters as it requires interpolation and is not as finite in detail as a meter. However, I'm not particularly in ned of meters and wish Mc would introduce a new series of SS amps in their MC275 chassis like the old MC250 and MC2100. That was a really cool design.
It seems that McIntosh hedged their bet a bit with the 250/2505. According to the book, the MC-250 and 2505 (which were identical units electrically except for the meters) were issued simultaneously (or close) with the expectation that the 250 would outsell the 2505 by 4 to 1. The reverse happened- so who knows. What's different now is the 44 years worth of an accepted signature look which was hardly the case during the 275's tenure until that time. Will this restyle doom McIntosh? I sincerely doubt it. Will they lose some sales? Possibly. Will they gain more sales than they lose? That's the million dollar question.
This is an eleven page thread of nothing but rank speculation....we're assuming everything! :yes:
Last edited:
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
Keep McIntosh looking like McIntosh, I'd like to see classic styled, pre Blue Meters Mc gear as a cheaper option for professional use and where it will be hidden in cabinets to cut costs.
There seem to be a certain percaption that so much hot air is being blown around for nothing. But like Leica, Rolex, Mercedes, Rolls Royce and other premium brands, McIntosh has a legacy and responsibility it cannot ignore. Its not a 'brand' that can be slapped on cars, laptops and TVs for revenue as like certain other brands we see. Once that path is taken, it may never be possible to back track. Off shore manufacturing and other text book management maneuvers that has diluted so much of corporate America should not be applied here.
