[wnmnkh]

I've got three McIntosh components and love them. If their headphones are OEM'd I'll pass.

 

  Still waiting for the Wilsons.
 
Not enchanted by McOEM's phones at all. Save the extra grand and just buy the Beyers instead.

 

 

So far what I got from McIntosh rep from CES:

1) It's being made by Beyerdynamic. They are not sure what drivers are going to be used. I hope at least tesla drivers for such huge price tag. It's closed back and I hope it wont have harsh high as T5 does.

2) It's currently very rougb prototype, very far from being finished. So do not disappointed with looks just yet...

3) The release date target is late spring, probably April or May.

Subcontracted!?  I figured that McIntosh® would design and manufacture the MHP-1000 in-house, as I understand to be the case with the legendary LD/HP™ transducers used on all their home- and mobile-audio products.

 
I do not understand the negativity toward this. I believe people at McIntosh chose a wise decision by letting a real headphone company to figure out instead of trying to make a 'flagship' headphone by themselves (which is just ridiculous when they have nearly zero experience on making headphones.) Headphones and speakers are very different animals (actually microphone is far more similar to headphones than speakers, thus a lot of headphone companies also make microphones); there is no guarantee LD/HP transducers would work as drivers on headphones.
 
At worst, MHP1000 will be as bad as T5p (literally the worst case). If that's the case it still would be not such a bad deal as in general McIntosh's products are overpriced.
 
That said, for amplifiers it is purely in-house design since they know how to make a decent amplifier.
 
 
 
 
At last, this is the picture of the headphones I took. 
 

 

[Audio Jester]

Interesting. A gutsy move by McIntosh, I am curious how this is going to play out as it seems to me that Beyerdynamic might have agreed to this with the understanding that the McIntosh name can fetch a high price tag. If it turns out to just be all hype and no huff then , but if this is a bar-raiser I am very interested!

 

[Audio Jester]

Also I'd wager the final version will look quite different.

 

[kurochin]

My main concern with all these "brand" names coming on-board the headphone bandwagon is to do with the prices going upwards. $1000 - $1500 today gets you excellent headphones. I'm worried that similar quality will cost double that (or more) in a couple of years.

 

[Audio Jester]

My main concern with all these "brand" names coming on-board the headphone bandwagon is to do with the prices going upwards. $1000 - $1500 today gets you excellent headphones. I'm worried that similar quality will cost double that (or more) in a couple of years.

High end does not change that much. Look at the prices of the Orpheus and R10 when they were released, we just have more choice now.

 

[GoldfishX]

Also, more competition = more competitive prices. If McIntosh launches an overpriced headphone that no one buys, they'll either need to discontinue it or lower the price (or allow dealers to sell them at a discount, whatever works I guess...their whole business model makes no sense to me). I feel like the market sweet spot for high end headphones right now is between 1000-2000 (and that doesn't mean ones priced less don't deliver either). To go anywhere near $1000, you better offer something amazing that can beat an HD600 or Mad Dog convincingly. If you go above 2000, you REALLY need to offer something groundbreakingly amazing (sorry Ultrasone, your S-logic does not qualify) or pack in an amp or something.
 
Really, unless people flock to overpriced gear in the next few years, I don't see the dynamics of the market changing. I think it's in a good balance as is.
 
Now...if Sony wanted to re-release the R10 and slap a $3000/$4000 pricetag on it, then there might be something cooking.

 

[Audio Jester]

Now...if Sony wanted to re-release the R10 and slap a $3000/$4000 pricetag on it, then there might be something cooking.

Dear Sony,
New R10 plox.
Do it.

 

[m2man]

I'm surprised the head phone amp has "bass boost". Very Beats too me. I think the amp has me more interested than the head phone. I mean they are good at making amps at least.

 

[AnakChan]

I'm surprised the head phone amp has "bass boost". Very Beats too me. I think the amp has me more interested than the head phone. I mean they are good at making amps at least.

 
Quite a few of the mid/high end speaker amp makers actually do have a treble and bass dials for their pre/integrated amps. Probably just carried on from that. I think it's fine to have such options there. Personally I don't EQ nor use such options but no shame if others wanted too - whatever works for them. There's quite a bit of purist and snobbery that goes on here of what "should" or what "shouldn't" which personally I don't agree with. Just go for what works for you.

 

[Armaegis]

I would get a good chuckle if I saw a headphone amp with a "loudness" contour switch/dial

 

[sfoclt]

   
It's overpriced when $1000 of the list price is probably for the McIntosh name...

 
Every purchase price has a goodwill component.  The market determines that allocation.

 

[sfoclt]

I'm surprised the head phone amp has "bass boost". Very Beats too me. I think the amp has me more interested than the head phone. I mean they are good at making amps at least.

 
In older McIntosh implementations, tone controls are essentially out of the circuit at the center position and they usually have bypass button as well.  It's strictly a convenience feature.

 

[Beagle]

   
Every purchase price has a goodwill component.  The market determines that allocation.

 
The market or the brand reputation?

 

[Tingc222]

What people appreciate about McIntosh is that it's all made in-house, by hand, and with a pedigree. Fans enjoy the unique sound - bold, dynamic, and quintessentially American. 
 
To capitalize in an enthusiast-driven market such as headphones requires the company to have pedigree, significant R&D, and/or at least some level of originality, so that at the very least there's community appreciation of what was achieved. This move by McIntosh, from what it seems, satisfies none of these requisites. McIntosh needs what one can argue Grado has in headphones, but it doesn't even try (from what it seems....I know it's all preliminary for the time being).
 
Much like Blackberry trying to capitalize on consumer products. You can do one thing and do it incredibly well, but don't spread your efforts too thin, or you'll lose.
 
This is a weak move by Mac and I don't think it will fly. It'll flop much like their speakers did.

 

[Audio Jester]

What people appreciate about McIntosh is that it's all made in-house, by hand, and with a pedigree. Fans enjoy the unique sound - bold, dynamic, and quintessentially American. 

To capitalize in an enthusiast-driven market such as headphones requires the company to have pedigree, significant R&D, and/or at least some level of originality, so that at the very least there's community appreciation of what was achieved. This move by McIntosh, from what it seems, satisfies none of these requisites. McIntosh needs what one can argue Grado has in headphones, but it doesn't even try (from what it seems....I know it's all preliminary for the time being).

Much like Blackberry trying to capitalize on consumer products. You can do one thing and do it incredibly well, but don't spread your efforts too thin, or you'll lose.

This is a weak move by Mac and I don't think it will fly. It'll flop much like their speakers did.

I think your last sentence raises a solid point. McIntosh are trying to release a pair of headphones, but without decent R'n'D they cannot hope to compete and they run the risk of repeating their mistakes made with speakers. Enter Beyerdynamic, who can offer expertise and give a solid launching pad for McIntosh. You can't have it both ways, they cannot make it entirely in house and have something that draws from a deep history of headphone design, so really this option is probably the best in order to get something to market in a shorter time frame with lower development costs. Let's not forget Denon and Apple who relied on Fostex to get them into the their current market position. It makes good business sense in my eyes.