$6k Mcintosh MX200 11.2CH AV Processor Overpriced?

[Eppie]

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.

So given a full set of XLR outputs that allow for long cable runs, how would you design the system now? Would you go active for the entire bed layer with full range speakers in the ceiling? For a commercially available system, it would likely not have a bank of amps like you have, but have the DSP and amps built into the speaker cabinet. You have often proposed that the future of speakers is built in DSP and amplification, which would pair nicely with a pre-pro like the MX200.

 

[TankTop5]

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’d really like to see an AV processor that has wireless multi channel speaker connection. There are some gimmick soundbars doing it and Sonos gives you 5 channels but no mainstream AV processors offer it. Is you just had to have a power outlet without worrying about running speaker wires I think a lot of people would go to multi channel. The only drawback I see is it does nothing for the AV manufacturer unless they also sell the speakers which generally are garbage.

 

[Eppie]

I’d really like to see an AV processor that has wireless multi channel speaker connection. There are some gimmick soundbars doing it and Sonos gives you 5 channels but no mainstream AV processors offer it. Is you just had to have a power outlet without worrying about running speaker wires I think a lot of people would go to multi channel. The only drawback I see is it does nothing for the AV manufacturer unless they also sell the speakers which generally are garbage.

I think Sony offers a wireless package but like Sonos it is proprietary using their own speakers. We need a wireless standard that allows for multiple channels used in a HT setup and probably an accurate way to sync video.

 

[TankTop5]

I think Sony offers a wireless package but like Sonos it is proprietary using their own speakers. We need a wireless standard that allows for multiple channels used in a HT setup and probably an accurate way to sync video.

Imagine 6 height channels with just power and a six channel wireless amp in the attic.

I’ve looked at the NAD M10v2 that can do 4.2 surround with two rea/side wireless speakers but there’s almost no compatible speakers. If they would offer a decent wireless class D monoblock I think a lot of people would adopt it just for WAF

 

[Trell]

I think Sony offers a wireless package but like Sonos it is proprietary using their own speakers. We need a wireless standard that allows for multiple channels used in a HT setup and probably an accurate way to sync video.

Not only sync video but perfect sync among all the monitors during playback (gamers will likely not be happy with this one). Resistance to other RF traffic is very important, of course. And then the standard should have at CD level data rate for transmission.

Then there is various DRM that will complicate it all and add expenses.

 

[ban25]

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

To be honest, the only reason McIntosh AVPs exist is so owners can have a complete set, when paired with their amps (which are all XLR).

 

[Trell]

To be honest, the only reason McIntosh AVPs exist is so owners can have a complete set, when paired with their amps (which are all XLR).

I dunno, they could use 6.3mm stereo TRS jacks (balanced) that properly handles mono-jacks (mono) for use with RCA, like what RME does with their audio interfaces costing far less. It for sure would take up far less real estate and sounding exactly the same (absent level differences, of course).

The down-side is to use adapters, but that's it, essentially.

 

[VonMagnum]

XLR seems a bit oversized a connector for 2024, particularly if it means RCA only for subs (contradiction in terms for this brand at this price level).

Couldn't they make an XLR Jr type connector to save space on the back panel like Mini-DSP and Monoprice do for a plethora of connections (bare wire terminal blocks only instead of huge banana or spade connectors)? Even Toslink made a tiny version for MD portables and the like. Or as someone suggested above, a different balanced connector with an adapter (RCA users will need adapters or hybrid cables anyway).

Frankly, at that price level (shades of Lexicon MC-1/MC-8), I would have expected Auro-3D and IMAX Enhanced just because. But I gather while Lexicon was more about high-end functionality over form (Logic 7, THX, DSP, etc), Macintosh has always been more about vintage name cachet and the cool looking green nameplate (shrug).

If only their tube amps glowed green (I would have used custom green glass filtered tubes or some kind of green colored glass filter cover over the tube area (with ventilation) to get the effect, personally.

 

[Trebdp83]

Mcintosh AVPs are usually under featured and overpriced but this one is just bullshit like their MHT300 AVR. Not nearly the eye candy of other models, they are the least attractive products of the bunch.