2. amps-preamps
  3. 1173654225

MC402 vs FPB 300cx

Anyone have any insight here...These are two amps I am considering going for, but have a little concern leaving Krell. I have read alot on both, most of the information on the FPB I am familiar, and I am familiar with the Krell sound. The Mc402 however seems to get some commentary in the Bass area, lackthereof. I love the bass slam of my Krell, and I love the detail of it. Is MAC way off in terms of sound signature? Does the 402 give slam, or does it roll?

Thanks for any insight anyone has.
jc51373
mhelming
24 posts
 
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...
audphile1's avatar
audphile1
4,914 posts
 
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).
mhelming
24 posts
 
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.
dbld
297 posts
 
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.
audphile1's avatar
audphile1
4,914 posts
 
Mhelming, yes, by ear measure. If it fails this test, it doesn't really matter how it looks like on paper.

I auditioned the MC402 with B&W 803S. Did not like the way it handled the B&Ws, which are not an easy speaker to drive as the impedence goes into a 3ohm category.
Sound was good on normal listening levels but once pushed harder, it really didn't stay together that good.

Very much possible that you prefer Mac sound over Bryston...depends on a system context. I can see that.

Enjoy your MAC!
More to discover