The $27,900 disappointment? Wilson Audio Watt Puppy 8 issues.

Guys like this place actual listening, in a proper musical system, DEAD LAST. It's all about getting their test rig to show a flat FR, plus a BOM with little room for profit. So boring - like most speakers designed this way. 

We live in a clickbait era, so these videos get him a large audience plus a ready market to buy his stuff. Good for him. 

@hjdca Beautiful system! You know what sounds good - ignore the noise floor from YouTube hucksters. That's a different hobby than what you (and me) are doing. 

I’m not so sure I’d jump on tube amps as problematic for Wilsons because of a 2-ohm dip. Especially with mono 275’s - those 4 ohm taps actually become 2 ohm taps in mono mode (check the manual). Try those 4 / 2 ohm taps versus the 8 ohm (4 ohm mono) taps, and choose whichever sounds best. I suspect one or both of them will sound great, and you won’t hurt anything. In fact Solid State amps are the ones that you have to worry about, if they’re not truly "2-ohms stable"! Look for a solid state amp that spec’s its power ratings down to 2 ohms - otherwise, cross your fingers and good luck! And if you are bridging a SS to mono, you are REALLY playing with fire putting that on a 2-ohm dip (don’t do that unless you have something like a Krell spec’d down to 1 ohm). The way that tube amps "switch to mono" is by paralleling the OPT’s, which should actually work nicely for scenarios like this. By comparison, SS bridging is bad news here.

Some of you guys will move mountains to solve problems that don’t exist
Anyways - why not ask Wilson what they think / suggest?

I guess I am wondering where is the trade off for Voltage vs Current regarding the sweet spot for the two MC275s parallel monoblock and the W/P 8s ?

This is where the analysis ends and listening takes over - both the 4 and 8 ohms taps should be perfectly adequate, for W/P 8 in your configuration. Listen to each over a few sessions ands pick your favorite. Most tube amp manufacturers will tell you the same (e.g. VAC stresses this - and they make tube amps in the same stereo/mono switchable configuration). If Wilson Audio has extensive experience with W/P 8 on mono MC275's (or similar tube amps) they may give a more specific recommendation, but at the end of the day it's a preference. 

SS amps will again give a different sonic result, but you need to be more careful there - ensuring the amp is going to handle 2 ohms without overheating or tripping fuses, protection mode, etc. As another poster mentioned - SS amps do (usually) produce more power into low impedance, but they have to work a lot harder for it, and that has ramifications. Tube amps are actually all fine here, no worries!

If we're gonna question every W/P owner's posting credentials, why don't we bring up Danny Richie's past association with AV123 and its convicted criminal scammer Mark Schifter? Geez. I hate YouTube personalities. 

You can also hop on ASR and find plenty of hate for DR's design and parts choices. That would be akin to DR's attempted take-down of a 20 year old Wilson design. But they're no better to me - ASR also represents a VERY different perspective on this hobby versus myself and many (most?) on this forum. 

@hjdca 
It makes sense that the 4 / 2 ohm taps give you more perceived bass. As amp output impedance rises to be "significant" versus the bass-frequency impedance dip (2 ohms), more of the amp's generated signal is "lost" due to the resultant voltage divider (Ohm's law). E.g. 2 ohms into 2ohms loses 6 dB of signal (in theory), 0.4 ohms into 2 ohms loses only 1.6 dB, and 0.1 ohms loses only 0.4dB. Of course the full picture is much more complex than just this. 

Since Wilson is probably focused on actual listening results in "typical" rooms, it stands to reason they've acoustically tuned and "voiced" their speaker to sound good with popular audiophile amplifiers, including tube amps, which will demonstrate some losses in bass region from this. 

"An amps ability to drive lower impedance loads has no relation to the amps quality."

I can’t agree with this. The ability to drive lower impedance loads means that the power supply has to be up to the task. This would include such things as heavier gauge wiring in the transformer, and other places, and "bigger" supply caps, and that does infer a higher quality.

And more output devices, and more heatsinking...but this assumes an "equal grounds" approach via traditional A / AB topologies with linear PSU’s. There’s rail switching designs, PSU modulating, class D - all kinds of alternate approaches that can be utilized to generate more power and low-impedance handling with less cost.

Boy we are way off topic lol. All good engineering makes certain assumptions about the intended applications and audience for a product. It’s completely valid for Wilson to take the approach they have - for the sound quality they were trying to achieve, the context of the time perdiod, their intended audience (who are generaly NOT cheapskates when it comes to amps), etc. Complete hubris for DR to come in 20 years later and act superior for tearing down a Wilson against the parameters of his TOTALLY different goals and customer base. He wants to show neat "high value" BOM’s and flat FR graphs for his modest boxes (mostly focused on bookshelf form factor) and drive them with receivers, I get it.

No one with expensive high quality speakers would drive these with cheap electronics. This isnt the issue. The issue is if Wilson can achieve the same quality of sound making the speakers higher impedance with a more refined curve.

Sure. Let’s see all new Wilsons engineered for 8ohms and 90 dB minimum, so that any HT receiver can drive them. But why stop there? Let’s also spec their boxes much smaller, so it’s easy to ship and integrate into grandma’s home decor. Let’s lower all prices to $5K max, so even college students can afford a "top" Wilson. We’ll also redesign their voicing to show nice flat FR (for the ASR crowd) and stick it full of parts that (listed at full retail, of course) make it look like there’s very little room for profit atop the BOM. Wow! Now we have a Danny Richie speaker.

Why is anyone else trying to tell Wilson & its customers what they "should" care about in their design decisions? Again, good engineering starts with sorting out the "I don’t care"’s from the "I REALLY care"’s - and Wilson has clearly made an enduring name for themselves, in a crowded industry, with their choices in this matter.