To monoblock or not to monoblock McIntosh MC275's


Hi everyone,

I'd appreciate your opinions on the matter. I currently own an MC275 MK IV, running McIntosh XRT 28's. It sounds great - even though the XRT's can handle up 1200W and the MC275's output 80-90W.

I got my hands on a NOS (still sealed) MK IV, and I'm debating whether I should keep it and run as them monoblocks. The reason I'm not trying it personally, is because I don't want to open that new one that's still sealed.

So my dilemma is -  would running 2 MC275 as monoblocks make a BIG difference in sound quality?

I'm sure it will be louder, but for the sake of the argument, if my sound is now 100% - in your opinion
(hypothetically speaking) will it improve it to say 103% or 120%? Will I notice a big enough difference?

Thank you!
yyman23
As a point of information, when the MC275 is operated in mono mode it is not bridged. The two channels are paralleled instead, which is different than bridging. And while I have no knowledge of how its sonics may compare between stereo mode and mono mode, the sonic downside that is commonly associated with bridged operation of an amp is not applicable to it.

Also, I believe that the human ear can potentially discern volume differences on the order of 1 db. I have seen it said by various reviewers over the years that to assure an A/B comparison between two components is valid levels should be matched to a small fraction of a db. And stepped volume controls on well designed preamps typically provide resolutions of considerably less than 3 db over at least most of their range.

Regards,
-- Al

almarg
As a point of information, when the MC275 is operated in mono mode it is not bridged. The two channels are paralleled instead, which is different than bridging ...
That's very interesting and new to me, Al. Thanks for sharing!

Do you know if any amplifier be used in parallel fashion? Are there any downsides to this mode of use?

As an aside, I've never been a fan of bridged operation, and think it's best to just get a more powerful amplifier.

I had two MC275 mk6's. For me their was a substantial improvement in sound quality from playing one in stereo and then trying two as mono's. I found even more improvement when I upgraded all 22 tubes. I compared them also to my MC601 mono's. For me the winning combination was the MC601's. I still have the MC601s. I don't play rock or any music very loud either. I do miss the orange glow of the MC275 mk6's with the LEDs off. The MC275 are beautiful speakers in my eye.
Mono blocks are way cool.  I think you'll enjoy the fact that you have them and whatever additional power overhead they provide.  Running in parallel according to Almarg would appear to a benign move, in terms of SQ.
Cleeds, the vintage Dynaco ST-70 is another amplifier that I recall has provisions for operation with the two channels paralleled. I’d imagine there are others, among tube amps that have output transformers.

It is of course physically possible to parallel the channels of any tube amp having an output transformer, by jumpering the appropriate output taps together and applying the same input to both channels via a y-adapter. I would not want to do that without a specific indication from the manufacturer that it is ok, however. One reason being that if a tube or something else were to cause a failure in one channel while the amp is operating the other channel would be attempting to put out a full power signal while that channel would be attempting to force their paralleled outputs to zero volts. Which of course may be unhealthy unless that possibility is specifically addressed in the design. And for that reason among others paralleling the channels of a solid state amp would be out of the question in nearly all cases, since the near zero output impedance of nearly all solid state amps would not provide any limiting of the resulting current flow. On the other hand, though, solid state amps can of course be designed such that they can be bridged.

As Tomcy6 noted earlier in the thread, paralleling the channels results in the load impedance that is nominally optimal for each output tap being cut in half, relative to stereo operation. The MC275 and ST-70 provide 16 ohm taps, so using those taps in parallel would presumably result in an optimal match for an 8 ohm speaker. But if an amp only provides 4 and 8 ohm taps, parallel operation would in effect only provide 2 and 4 ohm taps.

As can be seen in the specs for the MC275 parallel operation will double an amp’s rated power capability. While if a bridged amp is designed with sufficient robustness, in terms of its current capability and thermal management, it can potentially/theoretically result in the rated power capability increasing by as much as a factor of 4, since the output voltage provided across a load by a bridged amp would be doubled (relative to stereo operation) if the correspondingly increased current can be provided and sustained. (For a given load resistance power is proportional to the square of voltage, as you no doubt realize). As a practical matter, though, the increase in the power capability of an amp operated in bridged mode often falls significantly short of that factor of 4.

With respect to the sound quality of an amp operated with the channels paralleled, I’d imagine that a significant factor would be how closely the characteristics of the two channels match. Although I have no particular feel for how critical differences between channels that are typically encountered would tend to be.

Best regards,
-- Al