New McIntosh ML1 Mk II
 

Just got this email this morning. New product I presume.

https://www.mcintoshlabs.com/products/speakers/ML1

Price?

$12K for pair

you think they have jumped the shark yet? I Understand bringing back the Tube pre's and amps, because everyone loved them. I'll even tell you I think McIntosh has made some great speakers, but so many people seem to have the opinion that the early ones weren't that great, I'm surprised they brought these back. when they teased the grateful dead thing, I truly Believed it would be a new MC 2300, didn't you?

Sadly, i have to agree. The proof is in the listening, but their sales material is unimpressive compared to other $12K speakers. Those enclosures and stands appear to have missed decades of development

+1 hard pass for me. :dunno:

It reminds me of the Mac amp stands. Are they ported or sealed? The early Mac speakers were sealed.

Best

Charles

They are sealed. Expensive but I’m in for a pair. Was looking for something around this size for a retro space. Very strange that McIntosh lists the price as “anticipated”!?!?

:lurk:

For a truer retro look, you might consider JBL and Harbeth

I like the concept, but I would have removed the logo at the base and done a simple black cloth removal grill with a tiny Mc label.

Since they are sealed I feel much better about the speaker. My guess would have been ported. When I was a kid I saw a pair of ML-2C's in Decatur Alabama where I grew up. They were owned by a physician who had a full McIntosh system. I listened to them in his living room. They must have sounded pretty good because I was listening to Bozak Concert Grands at home. I don't remember being negatively impressed.

I was fascinated by McIntosh as a kid. Mac sent out all kinds of extensive literature as to why their speakers were better than anybody's. The ML-1C and 2C launched Mac as a speaker company. Recently, Mac has switched to ported systems as have almost all manufacturers, but their speakers used to be sealed. Mac has extensive experience producing sealed systems similar to this "new" speaker, which really is not be new at all but based on their experience with the ML series, hopefully. If this be the case, I am much warmer to the speaker. It will be a real competitor to the Tune Tot or the Harbeth M40.3 XD. I love the styling for obvious reasons. It reminds me so vividly of my childhood.

Mac is the only company that can look back 50 plus years and recreate a classic like an ML-1C.

p.s. if you vist Roger Russell's website you can read all about the ML-1C.

Best

Charles

Charles...let's not forget JBL and the L100, reborn as the L100 Classic.

Glad to see at least one or two here with an open mind.

My brother has a pair of original ML-1C. He loves them, and I would say they do sound pretty darn good in his system.

Charles,

I share your admiration of McIntosh and nostalgia for our collectively lost youth. But the sad thing about this is exactly the point you make--the sales materials did not describe in any meaningful way why this speaker is "better than anybody's".

To Vintage Pete's JBL, I would add Harbeth and (almost, at a spry 49 years!) Wilson.

Peter, I basically agree but the ML-1C nevertheless is the speaker that launched Mac as a speaker manufacturer. They are for sale on the internet as is the ML-2C whereas I doubt that you could find a 49 year old Harbeth or Wilson. The literature was important in that it showed the extensive research that went into the ML-1C which involved the use of equalization etc. Roger Russell has a very nice description of the original ML-1C.

Certainly, this does not mean to imply that the new version will be better or even as good sonically as the JBL, Wilson, or Harbeth. The competition is stiff but I'll bet that Mac will sell a lot of them.:yes:

Best

Charles

I am considering these speakers as would eliminate needing subwoofer.
Also like the idea of sealed cabinet.
This design looks more appealing than the XR100 with so many drivers. Not a fan of gloss finish.

Also looked at the JBL L100 classic but not crazy about made in China.

Maybe because of my age, prefer the retro looks.

Dan

I'm sorry, but not much of fan of this design. Other than update a vintage system,
and they could take it to a very high level according to all the development done to them,
why would you want to go this way?

I think the design is quite solid. I too like the fact that it is sealed. I believe it will have plenty of excellent bass. I too like the retro looks. It's very appealing to my eye. Yes, you are paying more because it is hand built by Mac in New York and not China or the UK. I hope that you buy a pair. There will always be detractors of any speaker but the new ML1 has a solid heritage. :yes:

Best

Charles

The look reminds me of the current KLH offering.

I spoke with my Mac friend regarding the new ML1. He heard it using a 611"s and C12000/MCD12000 in the Mac listening room. He was also playing the XRT1.1K's. He said the woofer was enormous and the bass was quite impressive going very low with great output even without the equalizer. The sound was basically "west coast" and that Mac spent quite a bit of money on the two midranges. He said the crossover was nearly the size of the woofer. It comes in four boxes. Two for the speakers and two for the stands. It really seems that Mac has gone all out in the design of the new ML1. According to my friend they have sold out already. He was demonstrating them to Eastern Europeans executives.

Best

Charles

wow, that sounds cool. Glad they sold out. wonder how many they made?

Definitely agree on all points and especially the JBL L100 (and all JBL's). Happy for McIntosh to have "sold out". Now, if they would just make another run of the MC75 at a reasonable price (but, what is 'reasonable' in this crazy hobby these days? :dunno:).

I didn't ask. One thing I left out: The grills are quite transparent and don't significantly affect the sonics. The new ML1 will be an extremely powerful beautiful speaker. I think it will be competitive with most of the McIntosh line.:yes:

Best

Charles

I think the "problem" with the MC75 is the MC275. I've read plenty of reports (here) that 2X MC75 is the better sounding solution, not disputing that. But with an excellent MC275 and no close competitors, they'd just be cannibalizing themselves for all but the die-hards. Much better from a business perspective to put the resources into something that will get them significant incremental volume

We all have our favorites that we would like to see reissued. However, it's not going to happen. There are apparently plenty of Mac vintage "small" power amps out there on the market for sale. I have it from a good source that a new MC275 run mono sounds better than run stereo and that if it doesn't the amp needs service. So buy two MC275's. Run them mono and you have much more power than from a MC75 reissue. BTW, I owned two MC75's. They were great amps. It was my biggest mistake that I traded them for a new solid state stereo Mac amp. I am upset with my old dealer to this day for not advising me to to keep these beautiful amps. He eagerly took my amps. I was young and didn't understand their value.

Best

Charles

Whether you consider me "a good source", or not............. I've run one MC275, two MC275s as monoblocks and a pair of MC75s (reissue) and, to my ears there is no comparison. The MC75 pair is superior to the MC275 run as a stereo amp and the the MC275 as a stereo amp is superior to a pair of MC275s run as mono amps. The difference is not huge, but certainly noticeable. Obviously, YMMV, but that is what my ears told me when I was running an MC2200 and McIntosh tube amps. Eventually I'll find a pair of MC75 reissue amps for what I'm willing to spend.

What was the difference in the sonics? Also, there's the question of the physical shape all the amps were in at that time. What do you mean by "reissue" MC75's. I assume you mean a pair of MC75's that has been completely reworked by a specialist and then re-issued as "new". Did you own these amps when you heard them or was it an audition? I wish that I had never parted with mine. Back in my day there was no such thing as "reissue". I owned original MC75's and a MC275 for years. Never changed a tube or had a service. The amps worked perfectly 100% reliable. Apparently from an engineering standpoint, the MC275 is designed to work equally well in mono or stereo. That's a definitive not debatable statement/fact, according to my friend. I myself don't remember any difference between a vintage MC275 and a vintage MC75 and I owned both of them for good lengths of time.

Perhaps someone else might comment concerning this question whose had experience. There's numerous variables involved. There's the vintage Mac tube sound vs the modern tube sound, etc. But again, I was told definitively that the MC275 vintage or modern was designed to run equally well in mono or stereo but of course you receive the added benefit of twice the power in mono. Many modern speakers require a larger tube amp than a MC75.

Best

Charles

Reissue means just that. The original MC75 & MC275 were made from '61-70. All others are "reissue", as were mine from about 10yr ago.
I purchased my MC275 MkIV from Gordon Gow's son, Frank Gow (may he RIP) at Audio Classics, along with a C2200.
Liked what I heard with the C2200/MC275MkIV, so decided to try two of the MC275s running as monoblocks. Frank told me some folks like them as such and some don't. I fell into the "don't" category.
Was using Joseph Audio RM-25XLs and Krell speakers (forgotten the model #) at the time.
Had more money then brains, so decided to try an MC2102. Frank warned me that I might not care for it as it was decidedly 'different' from an MC275. We made a deal that I would hold on to the MC275 while I tried the MC2102. He was right. The MC2102 went back after a bit of tube-rolling could not fix what was wrong.
About a year later Frank called to alert me to the reissue MC75, which he had on hold for me (if I wanted). I gave them a try and they were a step up from the single MC275 in stereo.
Don't miss the C2200 (the C22 MkV is a most worthy replacement). However, I do miss the reissue MC75 monoblocks and will eventually own another pair.
Have made several attempts at 'downsizing' into retirement over the past several years. All have been abject failures. No more of that for me.
My plan is to die with the C22 & a pair of MC75s. My wife can bury them with my ashes or sell all and take a great vacation (a better choice then burying).
As an aside, my new Devore 0/93 are scheduled for delivery Monday before lunch. I'm doing my best to not be excited.

Thank you for the comprehensive reply. Now I understand. We both regret terribly, trading our MC75's. You are a tube man with great experience with tubes. I never liked tubes or vinyl. I like prerecorded tapes much better and think all the hype concerning vinyl just that, hype. I've cleaned all the needles using a magnifying glass, put up with the record scratch and warp/rumble etc. and now the truth about it is out, the vast majority of vinyl has a digital step.

But I have to admit that tubes are a different story. I fell in love with the huge solid state amp prematurely. I believe that I have repressed memories of the beautiful Mac vintage tube sound that have been uncovered by experiencing my MC3500's. In my older age I "think" I understand somewhat why folks like you like tubes so much.

While typing this reply I am listening to Jazz In the Key of Blue by the Jimmy Cobb Quartet through my 3500's on SACD. It's a different presentation than through my 1.25's from top to bottom. "Huge" is a very strong word that you used but I think I may understand why you used it. When you hear the sound you love anything else pales by comparison. However, I also believe that that it is possible that the sonics my 1.25's provide may be preferred by someone else's ear, although I don't see how.

Take a digital master and put it on vinyl and you obtain the vinyl sound. Vinyl has a characteristic sonic signature that many like very much. The same is true I believe for tubes. For me the 3500 has meant rediscovering the sonics of my much younger years and childhood. But I think I'm pretty much a novice when it comes to tubes compared to you.

Absolute congrats on your new Devore's. They have received super reviews. I recently went to their website. I'll bet their 4 piece statement system is competitive with anything on the market.

Best

Charles

Saw an unboxing video of the ML1 MkIIs, they do look impressive and thumbs up on the retro design IMO.

https://www.audioaficionado.org/atta...1&d=1700081154

They do look good. What about the SQ? Did you have an opportunity to listen? I did not see a pair when I was at Audio Classics yesterday, but wasn't really looking for them. Missed opportunity on my part.

Not as of yet. Would be interesting to demo them against the DeVORE O/93 or O/96.