MC402 vs FPB 300cx

I just went back to my Krell, and WOW. It feels good to be home. Sounds better in everyway, no harshness at the same volume level. Maybe I just keep this amp, the Mac gave me a new found respect for it.

Thanks Audphile1....Thats what I think too. It's funny, I read around the forums here and elsewhere, and I can't believe how many Krell haters there are out there. The stuff sounds awesome, and one of the few I have listened to or owned that balances the full spectrum properly. Alot, and I mean alot, of very good products out there roll off on the bass. I am not a bass head, but it makes no sense to me to own something not capable of producing a tight punchy bass note. Bass is obviously interpreted differently among manufacturers I guess.

Would love to hear from more people with experience with this amp. thx!

Thanks Arthur, good suggestion. Its not so much that I want so much bass, as it is the type I guess, like you mentioned, 2d and 3d. Good points. I have been listening to alot of gear lately, really good stuff and I just haven't heard anything that produces the type of bass I am used to. I love my speakers though, and I have heard them on all solid state, and they deliver enough bass for me. I think like you said, it is the style I am looking for.

Quite honestly, I do alot more jazz and easy listening than I did when I first got into hi-fi, so bass is not as important as it once was. But I like to know the kind I prefer to hear is there when I spend this kind $$. I also don't mean to completely ignore the other sonic advantages that come in the amps are we are discussing, but Bass can sometimes be where the concern is with some amps, and Krell always seems to deliver in that area.

I guess the question remains are there others out there that compete with the Krell sound? Plinius maybe??

I have an MC402 in my trunk to listen to at home, so I will let you know what I think. My local dealer is very close to my work, so I figured what the heck. Now I can really have a basis to compare and judge the MAC sound vs. the Krell KAV sound.

First impressions...Not much time to post, sorry..Will catch up later.

Surprising Bass, exactly what I like. Much better than my current krell amp actually.

Mids are smooth and velvety.

Highs are detailed and airy.

I like this amp so far. More to come....

Mac better in every way in my system over the Krell so far. I am picking up more detail in my music, much more. Very nice sound stage, a little wider, and deeper, but much quieter, or darker if you will. Bass is taut (sp?) and punchy, appropriately so, no overly punchy, no boomy at all, balanced.

Voicing and mid range is very noticable. If I were going to label this amp with one strong point it would be in the mid range, very voicy and pronounced-which I prefer. Some may not though. The highs are nice, although a little more tsss, tsss, tsss than I am used to. I like it, just wonder if it can become fatiguing over time.

Here is a small issue for me...Lets say I do decide to go for this amp..It does not fit on my current salamader amp stand under my pre! Thing is a beast.

Obviously I have to live with this amp for a few days more, which they are allowing me. Wife is going away tomorrow, so I will really spend some time tomorrow night as well. By the way, she hates the needles and blue lights etc. No surprise there.

I am still very much interested in hearing an FPB series Krell. Just not many around is the problem.

Also, one other point to be made between these two amps...The MAC is a Class a/b circuit and the Krell FPB is a Class A. So quite honestly, the comparison may not be completely fair in that respect.

I am in MA, and there are one or (worthy) dealers up here. I have checked with just about everyone on MA, CT and no one has anything. There a couple of FPB 400cx on AG, but wouldn't be able to listen. Dealers also don't probably have any in stock since these aren't made anymore either. So I would have to find a demo, or a customer trade. So far, nothing on that front.

So after a night of listening to this amp (MC 402) I am very impressed. Although, the more I listen and discover positive, the more I learn about the negative. For me there is something just a tad bit sterile (for lack of a better word) about this amp. I don't feel as involved as with my Krell. Further listening will clarify that for me, but I am wondering if that has to width of the soundstage or depth, not sure. Will listen more. : )

Soooo true Brian, well said. I find auditioning equipment is well worth the effort, for more reasons than just finding out if the piece you are auditioning is for you. You learn about sonic differences for one thing, and what they are, so then you can understand what the heck people here are talking about when they describe 150 pound piece of metal and lead as "emotional". : )

Tonight is the true test for me to see if this is the right amp. I think alot of what I like about it at first is the power delivery, there is obviously better control over the drivers since it is 400watts.

But here is a point that I made earlier regarding the class a/b delivery of the MAC and Class A, which would validate why the Krell might show weakness in a system. Since the Krell is Class A it would make sense that it would show weakness in a given system, although I personally think my Preamp is first rate. A Class A circuit can be described as a piece of wire with gain, the output is basically an exact (100%) replica of the input, just larger. So, 100% of the input signal is used, whereas in an A/B circuit there is a range of usage, more than 50% but less than 100%. This has to be why we might hear tonal differences in the two types of circuits.

Splitting hairs of course...But good to be aware of in a process of auditioning in my opinion.

Thanks guys...Actually my current Krell is a Class A/B circuit..They don't give you Class A until you get into their Full Power Balanced line-up. And yes, Class A is part of what makes these amps very inefficient and A/B more efficient.

I think I figured out what it is that I am missing with the MAC as opposed to anything in the Krell line-speed. The MAC amp is sort of slow, which is what I think contributes to it being somewhat less uninvolving than the Krell. When and amp is slow, you lose a little of the rhythm of the music, and in turn some of the emotion. Anyone have any thoughts on that guess?

I think in the long run I would be very happy with the MAC, especially since I would be getting a killer deal. But I would always wonder what the Krell would have sounded like in my system. Darnit! this is a tough call.

One other point I would make here Florian...Have you listened to Krell and Mac, and literally A/B'd the two? If you have please forgive, but it seems you lack the experience and only have printed reviews to give you ANY insight into the Krell sound. I have put all these products in my system and listened, and take reviews at face value.

Dbld- I have heard this too. I think the reason people might say this is because the Mac is truly a 'balanced' connection. Meaning very simply, each pin breaks off into it's own path, they are not combined inside. So....If you have a preamp that is not truly balanced, it makes no sense to use Balanced, and you would most likely get better results with the RCA connection. I have a 5.5, and it is truly balanced.

So I took this one step further tonight and put the Mac in the place my Krell is currently in. Last night I had it just sitting out in the middle of the room, and it was an eyesore. So it is in the place it would live in my system now...I have to say, I like the way it looks ALOT better this way, I was a little skeptical before since this thing looks a little Spartan. I can see why people match up all Mac stuff, looks great. Kind of a status symbol ehh??

Anway, I am listening, listening and listening this eve...Allison Kraus (Union Station) right now, very nice. Amp is alot slower than Krell though, no doubt.

There is something a little harsh in the mid range with this amp, in my system....It's a little annoying actually. I am trying soooo much different music and finding whether I like it or not is dependant on the recordning, and the type of music. This amp seems to do better with Jazz in my system, once I get to a recording with more musical information, the mid range sounds like it runs together more. This may be to the 'slowness' of the amp, not being able to keep up like my Krell.

Lastly, I am reading through the owners manual of the Krell stuff and it has a disclaimer in there about using Tube Preamps with FPB equipment. Says it needs to be configured to accept the DC signal. Anyone have any experience with this?

Screw this thing....I don't want to be pigeon-holed in one type of music. I am listening to Diana Krall right now and she sounds great, but then I move to something else and I get aggravated. Fatigues me quickly.

Krell kills this thing, even at the KAV level. Sorry guys...More time I spend listening critically to this thing the more I want to throw it off my deck...If only it weren't so obease. : )

Audphile1, thats exactly what I feel like I am doing....Making myself like this thing, it's obviously not for me. They do have Levinson, and I may snag a 432 just so I can listen to on my system. I had a 36 DAC from ML a while back and I loved the sound, although it was a little dark, but nice overall presentation. Great for critical listening.

I honestly think in the end I will come full circle and go with Krell, seems like my heart lies there. I can honestly say, I am trying to move away from Krell and finding it VERY difficult. And this has little to do with being used to the sound of Krell. I am thrilled at the opportunity to listen to other amps and discover new things, but none of them stack up. I will try the Levinson and see if the buck stops there...If not it is FPB all the way baby!

I can honestly say in the end, I am not impressed at all with MAC other than in very relaxed presentations.

Hassel-this is a dealer demo, not a new piece so no need for break in.

I hear different responses for different types of music....I feel overall this would be a compromise for my tastes. There is no doubt to me though, that there is just an emptiness in the sound for me with this amp. It handles the full spectrum of sound fairly equally, with some semblence of balance. But overall I am find it sterile and uninvolving. Not for me..Glad I was able to do this though, otherwise I would never have known all these details. This amp is definately not for me...And in further researching someone needs to explain to me why McIntosh uses an output transformer ("Autoformer) with their power supply??? Kind of an odd design no?

I can honestly say after hearing this piece I would never buy anything McIntosh. I have auditioned other pieces I would love to buy (levinson), but McIntosh is not for me. Krell will be the next thing I listen too.

Sorry to be harsh on em, and I don't mean to offend..I just think this thing is overpriced for what one would get. But you make a good point on system synergy, maybe it doesn't sound good with B&W or VTL. Only thing I would say to that is that my dealer recommends them with B&W.

Who knows, bottom line it is not for me, and quite honestly I wish it were, because I don't want to continue the arduous process of auditioning. Nor do I want to pick this thing up again...I am listening to Cassandra Wilson right now, and when I get up to a moderate volume the Mid range becomes sharp, hissy, and overly pronounced. Don't get me wrong, there are some very nice qualities to this amp, just the sound is imcomplete to me.

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

So now that I am back to my Krell I can make a better more accurate comparison in what I heard in comparing my Krell (KAV) and the MC402.

MC402- very detailed, quiet, nice bass, not overly tight, but not boomy either. Full spectrum of the music represented with the Mac, whereas some amps are weak in one area or another. Mid-range however, at moderate volumes sounded harsh and etched in my system. Highs (and this is where I noticed a big difference) sounded grainy compared to my Krell.

All around the Krell is just smoother, very much smmooooooooother, more refined...More dynamic and more balanced and emotional. Dynamic peaks came from a darker soundstage with the Krell, as opposed to the MC402, I knew the tones were coming since it was so much slower. The Krell places instruments/performers better than the Mac as well.

I can say with confidence, and this might not please those with this amp, that it is NOT a weakness or difference in my system. The reason I say this is because I have had other amps in my system and they did very well. If for some reason however, the Mac can not work with something I have, that adds to the weaknesses of this amp IMO.

It is my belief McIntosh and Krell are in two completely diffent classes, even at the KAV level of Krell. One of the things I would use as an example is the parent company of McIntosh, and the fact they have piece where they slap their own faceplace on a crappy Escient product-weak. I don't mean to slam this amp, but I guess I am. If it were worth it's salt IMO, I would rave about it. I basically think the Mac is a tier below what I thought it would be, nice entry-level amp, but not for someone looking to move up from a Krell piece.

Sorry if I offended any Mac owners, but I would suggest going to audition a Kav and see for yourself. The difference is jaw-dropping.

Lack experience? I lugged this crappy amp home, listened critically for days and hours, and I lack experience? Hey Florian newsflash, you sound like an offended Mac owner. Rather than arguing and stooping to your level I will simply say, that quote was from my "First Impressions". So take what you want from whatever I wrote, where ever you want to, I could care less. The Mac is totally inferior in my system, and in comparing an FPB to the Mac is in FACT not completely accurate. One is Class A and the other Class A/B, case closed. There is a major difference in sonics.

Let me sum this up for you so people don't get the wrong message here on what I am and have been trying to say. The sound signature of the Mac amp is simply not for me. And any Krell, or Levinson amp I have EVER listened to in all my many years of experience in this hobby (not matter what the peripherals were) sounded better and more natural than the Mac. Which leads me to say the Mac is inferior in it's presentation of music in comparison to the amps I am considering.

Hi Mike, you make some good points, there may have been something wrong with the unit. It's certainly a possibility. Although it didn't sound like there were any major problems, which you can usually pick up on that pretty quickly. There was one other person here who had the exact same impression of the Mac that I had though, and I am not surprised there are more Mac owners responding than people with the same experiences that I have had.

When I described the amp midrange I also said it sounded etched, which is probably the most accurate adjective I used in describing it. It just didn't sound smooth and rhythmic to me at all, and I don't think this was because it was broken, just the way it sounded in my room etc.

When I say the Mac is a different amp than the Krell, I mean to the FPB line up, not my current Kav. I think the FPB is a different class. Neither here nor there though, as long as people like what they have is all that matters.

Joeyboy, I am buying an FPB 400cx, in the process of settling on one now.

Audphile1- I would LOVE a pair of Diamonds. Once I am finished with the AMP, I will look into it. They are nice.

Not to be a complete ball-buster, but I saw this and just couldn't resist..Particularly since HASSEL quoted me...Right back at cha HASSEL....Here is your description in your System description of the Mc402:
"I was diappointed when I first got it. The bass was there alright, but the highs sounded harsh, voices sharp."

This is exactly what I described it to sound like, and discovering you had the same impressions, albeit it different now, is just too funny.

Ok, done with this...I think I put into context very well the differences in an above response if you read through. Moving on....

Audphile1, I auditioned for only about an hour the 803d's. Smooth as silk...I actually had the dealer a/b back and forth from my current speaker 804 to the 803d, was very different.

I am not going to say I don't like the sound of my 804's anymore like I thought would happen-Phew! But the 803d is undoubtedly a better more balanced sounding speaker. Here is my contention with this potential upgrade- 1) price is a big jump from where I am now 2) Although much better, price to upgrade does not match the improvement in sound I heard 3) they are hugemungous-ginormous : ) 4) this is a personal preference, but I do not like the look of the extra driver (grills solve this).

So that leaves me with one remaining question for you...What about an upgrade to the newer 803s?? Too lateral? I am not looking to blow my head of with bass, but a nice low end usually ads to mid range smoothness and perception as well.

For the moment the 803s is more attainable, and quite honestly I like the height and look of them better.

803d's are in fact everything everyone here on the forums say they are though.

Great advice Audphile1...You really know your stuff. thx!

I have Nordost Tyr from source to pre, and pre to amp. Then Kimber 8tc for speakers. My dealer has already suggested it being the speaker cables and he is going to send me a set of Auditorium 23's to audition once they come back from a current audition. If sp cables solved glare I would be shocked, not that I am doubting, I would just be very impressed by that cable.

The amp is on standby at the moment, so it warms fairly quickly, but I think it sat ALOT and did nothing, so your points are good ones. And yes the amp is ridiculously resolving.

Another theory on this glare I am experiencing is the listening room...I have increased the soundstage of the speaker considerably blah, blah, blah. Maybe getting glare of the walls etc I was not getting before because the sound is greater. Crazy?

Thanks Audphile! Excellent points you make here..I think the next step is to a/b the 803Ds and the 803s. I don't know why I didn't do that when I was there before. Now that I think about it, over the years in this hobby I have never given the 803's a good listen, so I gotta do my due diligence.

I am also going to make sure they use better equipment for the next audition, since they used Mac equipment, which I don't like the sound of at all, and it was only 120 a channel. Poo!

This time, VTL and Bryston, since they don't have Krell, and I don't want to lug my FPB there. They won't let you take the Diamonds for a home audition because b&w has some strict policy about damage to those tweeters-basically because they cost so much. I fully admit, I loved the sound of the 803Ds, they reminded me of the difference I experienced when I put auditioned Levinson gear here at home, prior to settling on what I have now..Smooth, balanced, a little darker etc. But....And this is the exact same But I had with Levinson...I always thought the price did not justify the improvement in sound. More to come on that once hear the two 803's...

More importantly, I need to find some medication for this horrible disease I have come down with, Upgraditus.

Thanks guys...I will report back on my thoughts on the 803s. I don't want boomy, but I will spike them like I did my n804's which totally saps the boom right out of em.

I think long term I would just simply be happier something a smidge bigger to match the Krell (arrives next week). But, I gotta be honest, and it has nothing to do with the fact I own them now, I love my little N804s, they are a very capable speaker. I say capable because I have auditioned so much equipment over the years and they are able to reveal all the subtle differences pretty accurately, with b&w style of course.

803D's are an entirely different story altogether.

Amp is in, first impressions are good to excellent. To be honest the amp is not even close broken in yet. Previous owner just cracked the box 10 months ago and he was using for rear channels in HT. Go figure....Wish I could use a 400cx for rear channels, must be nice...Anyway, detail and control are great, darker background. I have gone through the Krell break-in process twice before, so surprisingly I can tell with my own ear. Is that good or does that make me pathetic?

One thing I have to get used to is the heat, holy crap this thing gets hot, heats my whole room up. Thermostat is in the same room and my heat has not kicked on once since I have been listening. Have to give it more breathing room since there is only a few inches above it at the moment; not even close to enough. This thing needs freedom.

One thing is for sure, and I am not happy about it. My existing speakers are outclassed now. Need 803D's and this system will be perfection.

Hey Aduphile1...I have not had a chance to get back there yet. I gotta be honest, I am afraid if I go back and listen to the 803d's again will walk out with them and $8k worth of debt.

I am experiencing a little glare, or glassiness if you will with this amp, and I have to diagnose what that could be. My first reaction is it is the speakers' crossover spec limitations being displayed by the amp. I have to give it more time of course, but glare is something I experienced with the MAC as well, although it was more pronounced. I am hoping the problem resolves itself as I listen more and more.

No thanks to Audphile, now I can't get my mind off the 803d's. : )

Interesting....So I will put that to the test for sure this week. Currently my front end is the Wavelength Brick, and will be the Cosecant this week, possibly today actually. The Cosecant is supposed to be significantly different so I will see if it is in fact upstream. Maybe also test with my Pioneer CD/DVD player-which is surprisingly good sounding actually.

Between Coupling Caps, upgrade to Cosecant, and speaker wire I could potentially beat this.

Thanks Aball! Some good points you have made on transparency.

I think you might be right, and if nothing else it's the path of least resistance first. I am actually anxious to try the Auditorium 23's as they are supposed to great for the money. I guess you could say 8tc is not quite up to the task of this system now, I was just hoping not to get sucked into the expensive speaker cable trap again. But heck, if it works I am game.

I gotta tell you though, the detail and smoothness, accuracy, and speed, bass response, silence, and soundstage is everything I expected in this amp. In that respect I love it. In fact the soundstage changed enough that I had to re-toe my speakers to compensate. But...I won't completely head over heels in love with this new Krell like I was my old Krell until I resolve the glare.

My ultimate fear is that this Krell is not for me, and have to go with another amp. That would be a chore and half.

How do you like your Pass? Nice choice.

Krell is recommending capacitively coupling the amp to resolve the glare issue-FPB is direct coupled of course. Something they recommend to do with Tube Preamps regardless, which I have. The KAV I owned before this FPB comes from the factory capacitively coupled. I personally think this is not the answer in trying to resolve sibilance, but the only thing that is compelling me to do it is the fact my KAV sounded great. Alot sweeter. If adding a capacitor into the signal path will change sibilance I will do it, but given the fact there already about 500 Caps already in the path, I have my doubts that adding one more will do much in softening glare.

Working in steps, taking deep breaths trying to be patient as I go..Otherwise, this thing is a boat anchor. : )

Krell is recommending capacitively coupling the amp to resolve the glare issue-FPB is direct coupled of course. Something they recommend to do with Tube Preamps regardless, which I have. The KAV I owned before this FPB comes from the factory capacitively coupled. I personally think this is not the answer in trying to resolve sibilance, but the only thing that is compelling me to do it is the fact my KAV sounded great. Alot sweeter. If adding a capacitor into the signal path will change sibilance I will do it, but given the fact there already about 500 Caps already in the path, I have my doubts that adding one more will do much in softening glare.

Working in steps, taking deep breaths trying to be patient as I go..Otherwise, this thing is a boat anchor. : )

Thanks Aball...Some good points you made. I am going to lift the hood on the amp today and remove the jumpers (per instructions from Krell) on the input stage of the amp itself.VTL is capacitively coupled on the output, so it is now double CC'd.

I will be impressed if it changes anything, expectations are low. Based on some of the points you made though and the fact my KAV was coupled on the input stage it makes sense to eliminate this as a possible solution to the glare.

The MC402 I had did this exact same thing, glared.

Good point, but it only happened/happened when they were inserted into the system.

Aball, Cosecant resolved about 80% of the sibilance I was experiencing. I am at a loss for words with the sound of this thing.

I am thinking the small remaining glare I might get could easily be resolved by a tweak.

Nwavesailor, I hear you...But I stand behind most of what I said about the Mac though. At the risk of this topic coming up again, the MC402 still sounded slow, etched, not smooth, predictable, no emotion and so on-in my system...I got a very good picture for the sonic signature of that amp regardless, and it just wasn't for me. Conversely, this Krell does everything I wanted it to outside of the sibilance I experienced before Cosecant, which I do believe I can resolve the small amount I have now.

At this point though you are right, in terms of the glare side-effect I experienced with the MAC, it most likely was my front end at the time.

Audphile1-you just reminded me I have to call them..The directions on the coupling caps were less than good. I lifted the hood on it last night and was hesitant to unplug what I thought were the jumpers they were instructing. Things just didn't match the sub-par instructions they provide to do this.

Do you still think I should go for it now? What the heck right? IF it will soften a little I would be willing to try it.

Audphile1-you just answered a question I had in my head...I was wondering that last night when I was looking inside, if there could be residual electricity. I will be careful.

I will tell, ya is marvelous looking inside this thing, incredible engineering.

I just opened the amp, and the the jumpers are NOT there..Meaning, caps are engaged, question answered. But who the heck took them off is the new question.

Audphile...I think I am going to tackle that as a last step. I have always done things out of order and it seems to make things more difficult. What do you think about Kimber Select with this mix? Smooth and detailed.

I am going to contact Krell tomorrow and ask if there is the possibility that they could have forgot to ad them etc, and ask them to send me some as well. I might as well see what happens when I put them in there. Although the more I listen the less the sibilance is an issue. I think things could stand to warm up just a smidgen, and the Auditorium 23 could help that. They are copper, but so is what I have now-a double run of 8tc for each channel bi-wired. Only way to know, is simply to try em out.

I know for sure what would solve this issue, but unfortunately is it an $8k solution. 803Ds! Because what you mentioned early about the 804s could not be more true. If they were a little more chubbed-out in the bass area I wouldn't notice much glare. In that way though, the 804 almost acts like a nice two-way speaker, which for alot of what I listen to is not necessarily a bad thing. But in the end I like a well-rounded system that can do all things.

Sigh.....Rome wasn't built in a day, neither are uber priced 2 channel audio systems.

Dbld-thanks so much for your write up, helps to hear you had a similar experience.

I am getting a set of Aud 23's just to listen to in a week or so. I will start my search with those as far as speaker cables goes, then move along if they don't work to my liking. Synergistic Research? They make a cable specifically for B&W.

Although the culprit could be my interconnects in the end...Nordost from source to pre, from pre to amp. Possible.

So at the moment, I am doing an A/B test between two single ended IC's in my system from source to Pre. One is my current Nordost Tyr and the other a lesser IC in the Nordost line up...Interesting differences. When I pull the Tyr out I loose a fairly noticable amount of sharp detail, and the other cable seems to round off the edge a little still providing acceptable detail, but overall I lose something. Not sure how to identify it completely, maybe channel seperation, detail, quietness, definately a smidge of emotion. I love the detail I get from the Tyr, but things are becoming clearer to me as I do tests like this. How much I can accompish with cable changes..Interesting learning process.

In the end it is probably just these speakers are limited with my new set up at moderate to high volume levels. Pisses me off, but I have only me to blame on that front. Personally I don't want to lose the detail from the Tyr to get the slight reduction of glare from the lesser IC. One thing is for sure, in doing this I am reminded that Tyr is a very impressive IC. And like you guys have said, contributing to revealing system weaknesses.

Could be...My experience in the past with Nordost was too bright.

This amp is getting easier and easier to listen to...I underestimated how unbroken in it really was. It was only used for rear channels and only used twice...Maybe it actually wasn't an exaggeration. More and more I listen, more and more I get easier, sibilance fades.

Either way, I am getting 803D's within the next month or two..I freakin love em, and they are perfect for my set up.