$6k Mcintosh MX200 11.2CH AV Processor Overpriced?

[gene]

The new McIntosh MX200 A/V Processor ($6,000) is a small and attractive 11.2-channel pre/pro. Replacing the MX100 from a couple years ago, the MX200 offers improved HDMI capability and adds Dirac Live room correction. With only 4 HDMI inputs and some other glaring omissions, we can't help but wonder is this the ideal AV processor for brand enthusiasts or is it just overpriced?

This slim line design is missing some key features from competitor products such as:

• XLR outputs for sub outs
• RCA preouts
• Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) and Auto Low Latency Mode (ALLM)
• Auro 3D & IMAX

Read: Mcintosh Launches $6k 11.2CH MX200 AV Processor

 

[Movie2099]

Premium brand, premium price. I'd say it's about $2k above where it should be.

 

[ryanosaur]

Nice write up, Jacob.

Agree, overpriced for what you are getting. But it is a McIntosh price for what you are buying!

 

[JerryLove]

McIntosh is the Rolex of the audio world.

• They are more expensive than they need to be.
• They are actually well built
• They are designed in a way that adds cost without adding function

If I were "money no object", I might have a largely McIntosh setup, because I like them.

At least they aren't a Bose or the like where you are paying more for less.

 

[Eppie]

I would assume the SW outputs are RCA to conserve space. The back panel is pretty jam-packed. At that price point I would expect 4 separate SW outs and DLBC. It has already been noted that for the short cable runs that occur in a rack, XLR is more of a marketing gimmick than a requirement. They could have gone RCA instead of XLR and added a lot more inputs or features with the available space.

 

[highfigh]

XLR outputs- true complimentary balanced LoZ, or quasi balanced? If the latter, it's clear that they only included the XLR to cater to the people who think it matters in this kind of equipment, ignoring the fact that they aren't needed for short cables.

 

[Bobby Bass]

Mildly Interesting- a great review category. Mc prices are over the top. I get it when there’s blue meters but no blue meters- no way.

 

[Trell]

I would assume the SW outputs are RCA to conserve space. The back panel is pretty jam-packed. At that price point I would expect 4 separate SW outs and DLBC. It has already been noted that for the short cable runs that occur in a rack, XLR is more of a marketing gimmick than a requirement. They could have gone RCA instead of XLR and added a lot more inputs or features with the available space.

Useful in case for connecting to active monitors, I guess, assuming it’s balanced output.

 

[Eppie]

Useful in case for connecting to active monitors, I guess, assuming it’s balanced output.

Active monitors in my view are more common in 2-channel setups. A complete active monitor setup in a surround system is rare. This is what TLS Guy has been promoting, though, so it will be interesting to see if people actually try a complete active speaker setup with a processor like the MX200.

 

[Trell]

Active monitors in my view are more common in 2-channel setups. A complete active monitor setup in a surround system is rare. This is what TLS Guy has been promoting, though, so it will be interesting to see if people actually try a complete active speaker setup with a processor like the MX200.

I’ve seriously considered a surround 5.1 setup of Genelec Ones several times but it got too expensive for me in the end. These are pro audio monitors, though. Each of the three fronts costs about the same as the MX200.

I do have two Genelec 2.1 desktop setups we’re quite happy with. Not the Ones, though, but they do have onboard DSP for roomEQ.

As for “rare”, perhaps @ryanosaur with his chef experience with “rare” can contribute with some tales, tall or not?

 

[Verdinut]

Without RCA preouts and asking price of $6K, McIntosh really have miscalculated!

 

[JerryLove]

Without RCA preouts and asking price of $6K, McIntosh really have miscalculated!

I'm confused. You are complaining that they use XLR (better) pre-outs?

You think the price is too low to assume people will get amps with balanced inputs?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

For $6K, it looks kind of like an Emotiva.

Couldn’t they at least put it in one of their bigger chassis?

 

[TLS Guy]

Active monitors in my view are more common in 2-channel setups. A complete active monitor setup in a surround system is rare. This is what TLS Guy has been promoting, though, so it will be interesting to see if people actually try a complete active speaker setup with a processor like the MX200.

To be clear, the fronts, and surround backs have active crossovers, the side surrounds are passive. The ceiling speakers are essentially active as they have no crossovers at all, as they are full range drivers. The full rangers work very well on movies and test files. Speech on test program is very natural. It is Prom Season from the RAH, and those speakers produce extremely natural ambience form the huge RAH dome using the Dolby upmixer.
The BBC have outdone themselves this year and the realism has been phenomenal. It is incredibly like being there.

 

[Verdinut]

I'm confused. You are complaining that they use XLR (better) pre-outs?

You think the price is too low to assume people will get amps with balanced inputs?

The reality is that balanced interconnects are overkill in home environments. There is absolutely no improvement or noise reduction using them on short lines. Their advantage is only with long cable runs. FYI, XLR interconnects were originally designed for pro audio which often requires long low voltage source cables.

IMO, McIntosh would sell more of them if they had RCA outputs. Several excellent power amplifiers don't have balanced XLR inputs.

 

[jinjuku]

For $6K, it looks kind of like an Emotiva.

Couldn’t they at least put it in one of their bigger chassis?

With the incredible amount of complexity it takes to make a modern Pre-Pro, I wouldn't be surprised if the licensed out a reference design.

 

[JerryLove]

The reality is that balanced interconnects are overkill in home environments. There is absolutely no improvement or noise reduction using them on short lines. Their advantage is only with long cable runs. FYI, XLR interconnects were originally designed for pro audio which often requires long low voltage source cables.

It's the go-to at this price point. All the cool kids are doing it. McIntosh has been doing it for decades.

There's certainly no down-side (other than cost).

IMO, McIntosh would sell more of them if they had RCA outputs. Several excellent power amplifiers don't have balanced XLR inputs.

I doubt it. Few if any who buys McIntosh don't have or won't get an XLR amp.

I would say they've been very successful over their more than half-century.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The reality is that balanced interconnects are overkill in home environments. There is absolutely no improvement or noise reduction using them on short lines. Their advantage is only with long cable runs. FYI, XLR interconnects were originally designed for pro audio which often requires long low voltage source cables.

IMO, McIntosh would sell more of them if they had RCA outputs. Several excellent power amplifiers don't have balanced XLR inputs.

I haven’t used RCA connectors in years, only XLR, even on my Yamaha RX-A3080 AVR.

I am sure there are many people who use RCA, especially if using AVR + ext amp.

If Mac had used a bigger chassis, they could have fitted both RCA + XLR.

 

[PENG]

I haven’t used RCA connectors in years, only XLR, even on my Yamaha RX-A3080 AVR.

I am sure there are many people who use RCA, especially if using AVR + ext amp.

If Mac had used a bigger chassis, they could have fitted both RCA + XLR.

Me too, but totally because I prefer the hardware, ease of connections, confirmed by the "click" etc.

Other than that, for short runs of cables, balanced connections, in theory can only add THD+N. Many hobbyist still believe balanced "sound better" based on hearsay and myth. It is true that in the old days, "fully" end to end differential balanced will have lower THD because it would cancel the even order harmonics, but that's a non issue with amps designed in recent years, such as the like of the Benchmark, Hypex, Purifi products that all measured with THD+N at least 10 dB below audibility, so cancel or not is a total non issue. Even if it is an issue, the topology used in end to end differential balance will only yield overall lower THD if implemented well, and if very low tolerance parts are used, that's why one would not likely find the relatively very affordable end to end balance amps such as Emotiva's, even ATI's (probably except the flag ship models) measured better than many well made amps by others such as Bryston, Parasound, McIntosh, Anthem's amps that are not truly/fully end to end balanced. Still, all moot points! Suffice to say XLRs/balanced are simply preferred by many, because of the advantage on the physical side, not so much the sonic side. Yes, I am just repeating things said before, just thought it might be worth repeating once in a while.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Me too, but totally because I prefer the hardware, ease of connections, confirmed by the "click" etc.

Other than that, for short runs of cables, balanced connections, in theory can only add THD+N. Many hobbyist still believe balanced "sound better" based on hearsay and myth. It is true that in the old days, "fully" end to end differential balanced will have lower THD because it would cancel the even order harmonics, but that's a non issue with amps designed in recent years, such as the like of the Benchmark, Hypex, Purifi products that all measured with THD+N at least 10 dB below audibility, so cancel or not is a total non issue. Even if it is an issue, the topology used in end to end differential balance will only yield overall lower THD if implemented well, and if very low tolerance parts are used, that's why one would not likely find the relatively very affordable end to end balance amps such as Emotiva's, even ATI's (probably except the flag ship models) measured better than many well made amps by others such as Bryston, Parasound, McIntosh, Anthem's amps that are not truly/fully end to end balanced. Still, all moot points! Suffice to say XLRs/balanced are simply preferred by many, because of the advantage on the physical side, not so much the sonic side. Yes, I am just repeating things said before, just thought it might be worth repeating once in a while.

Yep. XLR is just way cooler.