MC402 or MC275

Just one example
Tin Pan Alley using the mc275 sounds very good, same track same system SS power amps ( Wadia monoblocs) Omg ! Minding blowing -
now I've owned mc275s for 8 years never even thought to replace them been through loads of speakers a shame but the 275 just comes up a little short.

BTW I thought I shuld mention this, the headroom on the 402 vs your 275 is a big difference. The 275 is a fantstic amp but, when you want to rock out of just kick it up, the peaks can hit the 300+ range even on an efficient speaker.

I will give you an example, I am running Legacy Focus. They are an efficient speaker. The song Stank from audiogon wake up your ears sampler I love loud. It hits around 75-80 watts on the VU's but, when it peaks it hits the 350+ range. Talk about dynamics. I use that audiogon sampler for a lot of things. Below is a description of it and why i use it for dynamics testing.

Track 5
Title: Stank
Album: Explorations in Space and Time
Artist: Jamey Haddad/Mark Sherman/Lenny White
Genre: JazzChances are you’ve never heard uncompressed drums, but here you’ll be treated to three master percussionists going to town. Turn up the volume, but go slowly, we don’t want to blow up your speakers or headphones!
 
I think the MC302 is oft overlooked as many choose to stretch to the MC452. Be sure and educate us all about your experience with it.
 
Congrats on your purchase there, I have the MC 402 and love the way it drives my B&W 803D's.

On a side note which Ducati do you ride? I have the 848 and am contemplating the new 1299 Panagale S
 
A BOZAK is 10 to 12 db less efficient than a Klipschorn and 7 to 9 db less than a Cornwall. So if a Grand puts out 104 db at 10 watts a Cornerhorn puts out 104 db at 1 watt and a Cornwall around 101db. Now if your bi-amping the with the same voltage from each amp on a Grand then the difference is much narrower. Personally the Grands bass is much more realistic, and I prefer the sound of the B-209Bc 0ver the mid horn of the Klipsch. T he Klipsch speakers have tweeters with an extended top octave, and that's why I use Celestion super tweeters above 9600 HZ. Even with my MC 207 Mac amps pumping put almost 100 watt peaks per channel while tri amping, my dynamic range is significantly less than Klipschorns . But remember you have to choose if quantity is your main priority or if it is quality( Realism )!
 
Another thing to consider about Grands, if the bass is easily distributed between both channels and the enclosures are fairly close to each other they will couple to gether and deliver very substantial output below 30 HZ. When My Grands flanked the Moorish center cabinet which is about 60 " long I confirmed the speakers were down only 3 db at the 20 hz 1/3 octave in my listening room.
 
Your speakers are rated at 200 watts at 4 ohms. The Krell is rated at 800 watts for 4 ohms, so there is the potential for serious costly driver failure in your future. The Krell will give your speakers a little more zing and will tighten up the ported bass, too. Tad doesn't say if the 200 watt power handling of 200 watts is RMS power, average power, music power or peak power. If music power its assumed it includes 6 db peaks or a 50 watt RMS rating. If it RMS of 200 watts then the peak rating might be 800, but I find that impossible for one small woofer. So I lean toward the 200 watts being the music power rating. So having a 800 watt amp is a failure waiting to happen, especially as the amp doesn't have any real protection for the speaker. The Mac on the other hand if placed with in a reasonable distance from the speakers and the wire gauge chart followed in the owners manual will give exemplarily performance and offer protection to the valuable drivers in case of an operational mistake or oversight. The sound will be smoother, a little more laid back, with a potential for long sustained listening with less likely hood of fatigue factor. The bass will be faster and drier with the Krell, but the Mac is no slouch. Proper speaker placement will easily make larger changes than the difference in bass from either amp. From 80 hz up I bet you'll find you prefer the Mac for its presentation.

I don't know about your pre-amp, but Krell expresses concerns about pre-amps in the owners manual you might want to consider. Krell prefers you use their CAST system for the best performance between the Power amp and pre-amp. Krell further says their amp is balanced and to get the best performance should be used that way, where Mac seems to be a little more forgiving in that respect. Service after the sale is another consideration, and you know your Mac can be serviced by any numer of regional centers as well as by the Factory, Audio Classics, etc. When we thought about taking on the Krell line we decided there service polices which frowned on local service preferring factory repair or exchange was frowned upon. So when comparing to 7300's and 2600's at the time we passed. I mean if we wanted that sound we could always sell Yamaha for a lot less money.
My speakers are relatively high efficiency, and I run two Mc2300's in mono. (Potentially 1600+ watts) I probably use about 30 watts max. (The meters barely budge above -20DB)
It's like driving a Porsche 930. You aren't going to use that power unless it is called for, and it pretty much never is.
(Unless you are tooling up Rt. 95 in Nevada during the wee hours) :D
 
Last edited:
I think the MC302 is oft overlooked as many choose to stretch to the MC452. Be sure and educate us all about your experience with it.


Hi,
I agree with you, I have a few Mc,
Ma6900, ma7000, C2300, mc302, mc452 & MC402
The mc302 fights like a lion face to 402 & 452, they all have three different sound signature, the 402 is the most euphonic, the most neutral is the 452, the 302 is located halfway, romantic but somewhat colorful, powerful enough it is also less intransigent with bad records.

A great choice,

Congratulation ducatiman :)
 
Back
Top Bottom