I owned a KSA 100 and replaced it with an Audio Research D400MKII back in the mid-'90s. The ARC showed me just how bad the Krell was. The Krell sounded congested and lacked the musicality of the Audio Research. The Krell did, however, have a lot of slam and was beautiful to look at, but overall it wasn't a very good amp. I heard the KST amp several times and, for the money, I thought it was pretty good. For the right price, that may be the way to go. Good luck.
Krell KSA 100 vs KST 100
Mt current amp has gone (McIntosh 2275) and I am looking for a replacement in my system of a McIntosh MCD201 and Tannoy TD12s.
I have an eye on a Krell KSA 100 and a Krell KST 100 but do not know how they compare, if at all. As they are used then auditioning is not really on. My issue is I have heard reports that they may be cold or uninvolving but others report that the KSA 100 is a class A and therefore works really well and is not uninvolving.
Anyone experience of them, or am I barking up the wrong tree and should go for newer Krell or a different amp having come from valved Mcs?
I have an eye on a Krell KSA 100 and a Krell KST 100 but do not know how they compare, if at all. As they are used then auditioning is not really on. My issue is I have heard reports that they may be cold or uninvolving but others report that the KSA 100 is a class A and therefore works really well and is not uninvolving.
Anyone experience of them, or am I barking up the wrong tree and should go for newer Krell or a different amp having come from valved Mcs?