McCormack DNA-1 vs. B&K ST202 or 2140

Hey now...

I've narrowed down to two amps to drive my pending Martin Logans (SL3 or Quest). Both of which (i think) are 4ohm and have a max range of 200w (on paper).

Now, the DNA-1 is rated at 185w @ 8ohm so i'm sure its pumping out a ton at 4ohm.

the B&K 202 is 150w, and the 2140 is 140w. I'm sure both are over 200w (but not over 300w) at 4ohm.

any insight as to which would drive these big MLs best?
I know what all these amps sound like
The McCormack. It is better built and better sounding in my opinion. It also "Doubles down" to 370w continuous @ 4 ohms. It also pushes a good bit more into 2 ohms.

You just made my day. I've been driving my paradigm studio 100 v.2's with a DNA-1 DLX for about a month now and am just speechless that I am so lucky to have a stereo that sounds THIS GOOD LOUD!!!
The McCormack will do much better with a low impedance reactive speaker like an ML. B&K's typically work best with relatively benign, high impedance loads. Sean
Sean can tell you the technical details, but there is no question in my mind that the McCormack is the better sounding amp.
Can´t comment on the B&K but my DNA-1 dlx did a great job driving both the SL-3´s and the reQuests I used to own.