MC402 vs FPB 300cx

Good point. I will let you know once I get em.

In response to the McIntosh producing power into impedance. The 400 WPC into 8,4,or 2 ohms is a manufacturer published MINIMUM. Dynamic specs are not published and I verified this with a McIntosh Rep who assured me the 402 was capable of far more than it's faceplate nomenclature, especially when driving into descending impedances. All other comparisons aside between the Krell and The Mac, this particular point of contention is completely false. Although they may have different outputs into those impedances, stop at 400 the MC402 does not...

10-01-07: Mhelming
... Although they may have different outputs into those impedances, stop at 400 the MC402 does not...
Mhelming

Oh yeah? Where does it stop then? At 402?

Based on what I heard from this amplifier and its capabilities of driving a difficult load, I even doubt it makes 300w/ch so whatever that McIntosh rep said, I'd divide by 2(into 4) and by 4(into 2 ohms).

What were these difficult loads (specifically) low impedance speakers, large speakers? And what are you quantifying this with? Wattage? Current? Is this literally a by ear measure? I ask because I'm curious and as a relatively new-comer to the hobby (a year and a half in) I'm fascinated at the difference between ratings in power and actual sound. According to Mc there is greater than 100 amps current output per channel which would equate to a lot of watts, correct? I came from a Bryston 14b sst and like the sound of the Mac much more. It's much easier to listen to.

As I mentioned above, with below 2ohm dips, my speakers at the time were very current demanding. The Mac had absolutely no problem at all handling this.

Neither did the Krell for that matter.