McIntosh MC257 amplifier - 250x3 or 200x7

[RaceCarDriver]

I get the pricing difference between the $11,500 MC303 and $8,000 MC255, but paying a premium for a 5 channel amplifier only to use 3 of the channels seems off to me.

I am sure the 303 is on its way out, and most likely without a replacement. Like mentioned it’s aged. But the 303 with its 65 additional pounds of brawn would absolutely run away from the 255 or 275 in 3 channel mode. The MC303 is capable of over 1,000 watts per channel if fed healthy current and kept cool.

[MrG]

Hello Driver,
Allow me to illustrate the factors leading to my decision. I can see how it could be somewhat puzzling. When done perhaps you may understand my views but of course still may not agree with them. First lets take the savings off the table because that didn't enter into the decision.
For me it all came down to synergy with my particular system and application.
First lets look at power, which as you point out the 303 has in muscular abundance.
My system is a satellite subwoofer configuration. The satellite speakers have 15 in drivers in the base unit and are horn loaded. They are connected directly to the amplifier and fed by an outboard active crossover. These units are 105db @ 3ft. Using simple power to db math I could produce 120 db of continual sound pressure with only 32 watts of power. The 255 at 250 wpc would deliver 10db of headroom ( aprox 130 db ) and still have transient power available. The sub however is a bit less efficient. It uses a 15in driver and is also in a horn loaded enclosure. The sub is a folded horn standing 5'6" tall and having a 7 ' downward firing mouth providing 10 sq feet of radiating surface. This unit is 101 db @ 3ft. and is flat to 30hz. 32 watts of power would give me a slightly lower 116 db of sound pressure with 125db on tap as well as transient headroom. The sub is also connected directly to an amp and fed by a separate active crossover.
In this application additional power is not a consideration
65 pounds of additional brawn might suggest the value of autoformers which of course the 255 does not have. Once again the specific application is critical.
All three of my bass units are 8 ohms with relatively stable impedance. The autoformers are particularly impressive because they allow McIntosh amplifiers to produce rated power with every loudspeaker on the market and they can address some extreme impedances , but... not all speakers need the autoformer if they are electrically compatible with the amplifier. In addition some marvelous amplifiers do not have autoformers: Allow me to illustrate by referencing spectacular musical performance from two older McIntosh products. I have two favorites in the history of McIntosh. I believe they were, and in the right situation still are, some of the most musical sounding amplifiers ever made. ( please don't throw sharp objects, these are just my personal beliefs ) The McIntosh Mc 275, a legendary amp that most won't argue with. First produced in 1961. Second, my personal favorite the McIntosh Mc30. First produced in 1954. If you reference Chad Kassem, owner of Acoustic Sounds and look at his Blue Heaven Studios you will notice he runs Vacume Tube Logic and ….. McIntosh Mc 30's. The point here is that autoformers were not built into McIntosh amplifiers until 1967 with the introduction of the Mc 2505. Not all applications require autoformers for peak performance.
The 65 lbs of extra brawn in my case is not brawn, it's just extra.
Admitting to be unsure about my decision I called McIntosh. Following conversations regarding options available I became convinced that the 255 would work marvelously and that its new topology and design would be perfect for my needs. As a targeted home theater product it excels at low end grunt and my frequency demands will be right in that wheelhouse as they are 450 hz on down. Yes I will not need two of the power outputs, and I agree that seems weird at first, but idling them was also part of the design intent of the product allowing for a 25% increase in power capacity. I like to think of it as McIntosh providing the consumer with power configuration options, as they clearly promote the 3 channel 250 watt capacity of the amplifier.
Hope that helps explain my thinking.
Good Listening
G

[Vintage Pete]

Originally Posted by RaceCarDriver

I get the pricing difference between the $11,500 MC303 and $8,000 MC255, but paying a premium for a 5 channel amplifier only to use 3 of the channels seems off to me.

I am sure the 303 is on its way out, and most likely without a replacement. Like mentioned it’s aged. But the 303 with its 65 additional pounds of brawn would absolutely run away from the 255 or 275 in 3 channel mode. The MC303 is capable of over 1,000 watts per channel if fed healthy current and kept cool.

The MC303 is an awesome beast!

[clausdk]

Ordered one to run my 6 surround channels. Looking forward to it. Meters grown on me since seeing them for the first time.

[clausdk]

Finally arrived can't wait to hook it up. It will run surrounds/Atmos.

[Masterlu]

Originally Posted by clausdk

Finally arrived can't wait to hook it up. It will run surrounds/Atmos.

Congrats!

[tripitz]

Anyone do an A/B on the 257 and 207? I picked up a second 205 yesterday at a discount (new old stock) and went back and forth on buying into the improvements for the new generation (255 or 257).

Once I settle on new mains, I may end up with 2 mono 601/611s or a 462 to get the 7 channels.