Krell FPB 600 or 400cx?


I own Revel Ultima Salon 2s and am looking to upgrade my amp for better performance in the low end. Right now I'm just not getting any real punch or slam in the bass dept, and I know the Salons are capable of much more. I have the opportunity to go with a fpb 600 or the 400cx for around the same price. Any thoughts? Is the extra 200 watts of power on the 600 worth losing any sonic benefits of cx? Or is the cx so superior sonically that there's no comparison?

Thanks.

Josh
punishen1

Showing 1 response by tinear1

The bad rap Krell got in t about being bright, sterile etc. pertained to the pre 'c' and especially 'cx' models. My 400cx is smooth & warm and still has that famous Krell slam and bass control. If you want slam and incredible lower bass extension you'll love the 400cx. When I replaced my Classe 301 with my Krell 400cx I got another half octave of low bass that was just being hinted at before.

I've also learned that the 400cx is a real chameleon. Put in a warm tube preamp up front, and that's the overall character you'll hear (plus the punch unless the pre doesn't pass it). Put in a dead neutral, highly resolving pre, and that's what the system will give you. It's a great foundation for a system.

If you are more on the neutral side, the Krell pre's with the CAST connector is a great companion choice. As Wes Phillips said when he reviewed the CAST system, it really does work to create a quieter, more open conduit. His only cautionary note was that it might be so neutral that it can sound sterile, so depends on you upstream source as to how well that works. I use a Marantz SA-7S1 CDP, which is very rich and full bodied, so that's all the warmth I need.