NAD takes on the Krell Beast 1800 vs 6700??

My friend has a Adcom 700 CDP,Krell KBL linestage,NAD S-200 amp 225wpc.Diva 6.1 speakers 88ohmHis friend is selling a Krell KSA-250 250+ wpcWe listened to the Krell for one day then the next day the NAD.The Krell was run balanced with a Transparent Audio Super Link power cord.The NAD was run unbalanced with the stock power cord.The Krell had tactile kick drum slam,clear highs and very clean mids.The soundstage was wide but lacked depth.I was surprised at the flat soundstage.Imaging was so,so.Overall it sounded boring.With the NAD the very first thing I noticed is how it almost sounded 'tube like'.It was smoother and warmer.The soundstage was not quite as wide as the Krell but it had real depth.Imaging way better.The NAD won hands down.WHY??
The Emperor has not clothes. I've listened to Krell over the past 5 years, but only occassionally as I find it to truly be some of the most unmusical equipment available. It is quick, solid and extremely harsh. NAD has over its history at least always tended toward musical.

Great marketing, poor product. Any number of amplification products to include VTL, Plinius, Audio Refinement will hands down beat Krell musically. Period.
The only Krell KSA I have heard extensively is the 100S. It was definitely not harsh or bright as some have said of Krells. In fact the mids were sweetened to some degree. It was very smooth, but the amp was musically boring. The key issue was that PRAT was poor, there was a sense of there being a different amp driving the mids, from the amp driving the extremes, extension at the extremes seemed truncated particularly on the bottom, and overall dynamics were compressed.

While there were things to like about it, musically it was a dud, and was easily beaten by the modest Plinius 8200P - particularly if you stopped analysing and just listened for the music.

Don't know about the specific NAD you refer to, but they are usually musically engaging if a little compressed.
Thank you Redkiwi-My thread for the most part is a question as to how such an expensive and highly regarded manufacturer can bow to a much less expensive and often looked down upon manufacturer..(Gonad) ?
This KSA-250 is suppose to be one of the best Krell amps ever.
I know many variables and synegy play a crucial role but this should have been a K.O. by the Krell Beast regardless.
I know my ears and this NAD S-200 is the better of the two.$1800 VS $6700?? wow!!
I've had the NAD S200 for some time now. It is an undiscovered gem and it does indeed sound tubelike. Most audiophiles see "NAD" and think.....well, just another mid-fi warm sounding NAD product like all the other grey NAD stuff. The Silver NAD S200 and the companion S100 pre are leaps and bounds beyond your average NAD products. These NAD Silvers are certainly worth a listen.
How would you compare the NAD S200 v. NAD C370/C270 combination? Is the S200 more transparent, detailed? I'm looking for that nth degree of clarity and musicality without spending thousands.
my experience with krell has been more positive. i have krell ksa 100s , audible illusions modulus 3 pre-amp, micromega dac and transport and apogee stage...results: 3 D imaging, sweet highs, warm and palpable midrange. bass was good but could be tighter. i am rather pleased with the sound. i've heard the ksa 250 in the past and thought it was a nice amp though i did not compare it directly with NAD.
I like Celtic66's description of older Krells the best: quick, solid, and harsh. Amen to that! They do make great subwoofer amps, but even there they can be equaled by any number of amps for a whole lot less money and electricity. Of course, like everything else, Krells have gotten better. The KSA series is really showing its age.
It would perhaps be unfair to critique all older Krell amplifiers as being of one sound. I remember the KSA-250/150 sounding very different from the earlier KSA-200/80 models. The older KSA-200/80 sounded impressive, bold, and high impact, while the KSA-250 was all about control and reserve. I felt the KSA-250 was slightly soft in its upper mid to high frequency regions; this was especially noticeable when compared to the Krell MDA-500 monoblocks. I would guess the combination of the laid-back KSA-250 and the Transparent PC was not a great match with your friend's existing system. Maybe some minor tweaks would have brought it to life...
Yeah,blame the power cord!
I did expect this kind of reaction so Im not surprised.
OK,lets try a different power cord and some tweaks and lets see if we can make this 150 lb.beast that cost $6700 TEN YEARS AGO (whats that in todays market?) sound as good as a $1800 'GONAD'
why dont you compare it to a newer amp like fpb200 etc, anything 10years old is most likely not going to hold up well against new even lower priced gear. a 10 year old computer or car would easily show its age compared to new. just shows you get more bang for your buck now. this is apples and orangesnot really a good comparison,being a sound engineer for ml ive seen world class equipment made to sound bad and lesser gear made to sound very good. it all depends on who and how it is all set up and what the listener prefers and what he or she is acustume to hearing. high end is an acquired taste, sometimes at first listen little things are not picked up on . it takes a while to get use to correct sound versus hi fi which almost everyone starts with. if the nad sounds better to you great, but i wouldnt blame krell on a bad product. krell ml arc vtl bat bryston etc are all world class products,just different, ferrari porsche chevy bmw all make great cars, choice is many,all im saying is keep an open mind when trying out gear which is always difficult cause every time something is changed in a system there is a cause and effect which sometimes has nothing to do with the piece that has been added or taken out. by the way network cables or power cords in our experience do more harm then good,most manufactures only put detatchable cords on because of demand for them, we all agree they change sound whether better or worse dont know, but i can tell you lots of manufactures are going back to captive cords to eliminate the change of the sound of their gear by someone else. all gear is tested with the cord supplied,any change changes all specs as when it was built better or worse cant say but not as designed.enjoy your learning on sound and enjoy the music.regards ml engineering
Hi David; just an observation regarding soundstage differences: if the Krell inherently projects a laid back soundstage, the distance the speakers are from the wall behind becomes very important. OTOH, if the NADs natural soundstage is more forward, it could be that the present speaker placement is more suitable for the NAD-- if that's the kind of soundstaging you like.

I like a laidback soundstage and have purposely selected components and speakers to achieve it. My soundstage is very wide, but without much depth, and I'm used to that. My speakers are 4.5 ft. from the wall behind, but I know that if I could pull them out to 7-8 ft., I would then get much greater soundstage depth. For practical reasons I haven't done that-- except when experimenting.

I suppose it may be too that you've found a very synergistic combination with the NAD. I've got nothing against either NAD or Krell equipment, and whatever works, works. Good Luck and Cheers. Craig
Chances are, the Krell would improve markedly if you were to leave it powered up continually. The same could probably be said about the NAD, but probably not to the same extent.

There are good combinations, mediocre combinations and bad combinations. Sometimes, it simply takes the change of one link in the chain or careful optimization of what is already there to make it work "right" and really sing. Kind of like having the answer right in front of you but not being able to find it.

I agree with Craig and have similar philosophies. I am not brand sensitive when it comes down to making a system "groove". If someone can do that with NAD, Krell or Fisher-Price, so be it. The end result is all that counts, not what brand something is nor what you paid for it. Sean
Craig,Sean-Thanks for clearing this up for me a bit.
I was looking at this in black and white.
My thoughts were that such a price/reputation difference would surely be evident.
I figured the Krell should have stomped the NAD without even being turned on!!
Thanks again for your wisdome.
Case closed......:~)
Environmental issues are at hand.

Higher end components usually need more pampering to perform up to its potential? Maybe the listening environement wasn't to Krell's liking, so he decided not to get out of his pajamas, brush his teeth, and clear phlem out of his throat.

Next time, pamper the Krell, treat his friends well too. Move the speakers around a bit. Switch some speaker cables, interconnects, source component and such.

All it takes is a bad apple to spoil the batch, especially with picky people like Krell.

(i never used a krell in my life)
David your totally right. 2 of my favorite amps are the NAD S200 and the Meridian 557 Amp. Both of these Amps sound amazing.
Synergy,synergy,synergy.The nad worked with those speakers,wire combo.The krell would win with say.Martin logan,straight wire combo.Thats my rig and I have had the nad.The krell I am using is a KST 100.I had a ksa 50 that did not "work" well with those speaker ,wire combo.
Very easy becouse Krell is way over priced equipment. And that said Krell can work great with the right setup as with any high end audio its all about the right match. You can't just buy a Krell and think its going to automatically sound better then a 700 dollar NAD it totally depends on the speakers and such. But I firmly belive after comparing a $5000 Krell to a $3000 Ayre amp on Vandersteens model 5s that krell is way over priced, for how it sounded there was no Comparison there eather the Ayre sounded Much Much better in every aspect.
and NAD is way way underrated most highend audio guys out there says that NAD can't be good becouse it dosn't cost much and for some reason NAD just sounds Great in certan setups. I have Magnepans with true ribbons and I have tryed NADs and the sound was great. A somewhat Bright Speaker really lends it's self to the NAD.
To Funny How all the Krell lovers jump in and say it could be this or that. I would love to see there face's if they actually bought or barrowed from a dealer a NAD S-200 and set it up in there setup with no Changes to there setup at all. I think they would just be Shocked. I'm not saying the NAD would sound better but I think it would be so close maybe worse on somethings and better on others but so close that it would no way justify the price of a Krell.
I'd _LOVE_ to hear an NAD amp against my Krell KSA-300S running my Apogee Divas full-range. Let the "battle" begin at low and hgh volumes....
Audioone-Buy a Nad S-200 or see if a dealer can loan you one.
Then let us know your findings since you would love to hear one against your Krell.
How else would you know?
"let the battle begin" Well,start the battle!
I have listened to, and owned several amps over the last few years. The first amp I owned was a Rotel. I don't remember the model. This was around 1989. I replaced that with a JVC M2020 which was a much better sounding class A amp. When that began to age I bought a Forte Model 5. This was a step sideways. It could drive more difficult loads but the sound was thin compared to the JVC.

When I found my way to AudiogoN I sold my Forte and bought an Aragon 8008st. This amp was light-years ahead of the Forte and the JVC. In every way it sounded better. There was more punch, better, fuller midrange, smoother treble, bigger and deeper soundstage. Timbre's were much more natural than the amps I owned previously.

After several years of happy listening I had the chance to hear a smaller Krell. The model was a Full Power Balanced 200. Not one of the big or (relatively) expensive models. Everything the Aragon did to sound better than the Forte, and the JVC, the Krell did in spades.

I have never heard anyone say much bad about the Aragon 8008st, but there is no comparison between the two. The Krell is the best amp I have ever owned.

Have I ever owned an NAD amp? No, because I have listened to them in the store, and they didn't even sound good enough to take home and audition.

I'm sure you are very happy with your NAD amp, but it is foolish to compare an old Krell to the new NAD. The old Krell still probably sounds better, but technology has changed a lot in the last 15 years. What does a 15 year old NAD amp sound like?

I'm not sure why people feel the need to attack Krell. Have they ever murdered babies, or raped mothers, sold weapons of mass distruction to Iraq or Iran, was Dan standing on the grassy knoll in Dallas? Why the hostility. I hope it's not that people cannot afford to step up to better equipment so they denigrate it! I'm sure that would not be your motivation.
Wow, Krell owners sure seem to be a sensitive bunch, with really good imaginations, too, being able to declair their Krell superior to amps they've never even heard. That's pretty amazing, and I wish that I had that skill as it would save me a lot of time and effort....or not.

If anyone would like to hear or demo the NAD S-200 and lives near Richmond V.A. / D.C. drop me a line, I have one on hand. Feel free to bring your amp of choice along for a shootout.

FWIW, I've not hear a Krell that I would purchase over the S200, but the Krell sound isn't my cup of tea, and the price/performance ratio is perhaps the smallest in the industry to my ears, maybe only second to Spectral, so I won't offer my opinion on the NAD vs. Krell matter....
One of my friends has a NAD dealership and he's told me that he can't give the S200's away. While I don't know what they sound like, my guess is that "audiophiles" are prejudiced against NAD products being best suited for "starter systems". It's hard to shake an image, even a good one like "great bang for the buck", when you want to change marketing strategy. Sean
As I own a Krell ksa-250 this old thread cought my eye, I thought, hmmm, the nad must be a pretty good amp in deed. I thought I should check the poster's system to see if he had bought one of these great amps, thats when I had to LOL, what do I find: He drives a hyundai so he can drive his speakers with an amp that was trashed in review and a search finds that many people on the forums agree with the review, I think I'll keep the old krell, they get trashed a lot for their sound ( or lack of it ), but I have never read anything about having to give them away at a dealership. Sell the Aleph 3 and buy the NAD, or go see sean's dealer friend and get the Nad for almost free.
Seems like people that can't afford Krell love to stomp it without even caring to see further where the bad sound comes from. OTOH, Krell owners can also feel pressed to 'justify' their purchases since Krell products, even used, are so expensive. But the same can also be said about some of us that buy 'best bang for the buck' product. We'd like to think that we are smarter than those people that can afford to and do buy big-buck gears by saying that our 'cheap' system can come close or stomp a much more expensive system.
IMHO, the newer Krell amps are more like a transparent magnifier, so the quality of the components upstream is very important. I think that's the caveat with all the big-buck, hi-end SS amps, they are so transparent that you hear all the beauty and all the garbage from your source and pre-amp and you can't help but buy CDP/'table, pre-amp, IC's in the same class.
And the NAD, being more 'budget-conscious', I believe, is not as transparent as the Krell and therefore the better sound may be caused by its coloration that somehow complements the kind of sound that's coming from the CDP and pre-amp and makes it more musical. I believe if you are using a Krell amp (and pre-amp as stated in the original posting), you shouldn't use an Adcom as your CDP. It is better to use a Krell CDP and an Adcom amp.
It's not a matter of better and worse, just your preference.
Another Krell owner that can hear without having heard, Amazing!

Transparency is NOT at all where the S200 is lacking, not in the least, it's actually one of its strong suits and it is a revealing piece. What the S-200 does wrong is on the minimal subtractive side, it does nothing offensive nor does draw attention to itself from any shortcomings. Actually listen instead of talking junk, you might be a bit taken aback....
sogood51-I find your personal attack on me in very poor taste.
You point out I drive a hyandai (not anymore) but regardless,does my ex-car really bother you.
You mentioned I have a amp that was trashed 'in review'Actually numb nuts, it was one review and I didnt notice "many people on the forums agreed with the review" Where did you read that!?
In all fairness.I also took my aleph-3 to listen to, along with the NAD and Krell.
The Aleph-3 was the clear winner.I didnt mention this before as my friend who has the NAD S-200 reads these threads and he and I dont like to judge each others gear.
The Krell 250 he had, he had borrowed and was thinking about buying it until he heard it.
BTW,numbnuts..the system you checked out in my virtual system is my old system.Pay attention.
Oh,one more thing I forgot to mention.
I ended up selling the Krell on this site for the owner of the amp.
I had to list it twice to sell it.
I provided detailed pics of this amp that was/is in mint shape.
The owner (who thinks Krell is the last word) had me list it for $2900..The second listing (after I talked him down) was for $2400.He ended getting $2000 for it.
Lots of $2000 amps out there brand new that are at least as good as the Krell.Some people buy the name though.pity.
Socrates, the thread was started to talk junk, what part of talking junk don't you understand. Maybe you should get one, you know, put it up against your amp and give us all a report on which blows which away. The audio world is always on look-out for posts on these GIANT KILLERS, I should do a post on my Onkyo M-504 amp, after all it will blow the doors off some of the high-end amps I read about right here on audiogon. How about this: Onkyo takes on the PS AUDIO BEAST! The post was a TROLL post (or) David99 needs to be the one to Actually listen. I would say that the AMAZING Krell owners you speak of do listen, thats why they bought the Krell. The NAD may be a fine amp but would run out of steam and sound very bad in my system long before my Krell.
Dear DAVID, You should be smart enough to take your old systems off of audiogon, is that to hard for you to do? I could care less what a troll like you thinks, your the one that said you drive the HYANDAI so you could have your system, I took that info. from your post-Dahhh. Lots of audio forums out there smart guy, get off your butt and do a search for Aleph 3, is that to hard for you? Why did you get rid of such a great amp, did you have to ask the members here if it was OK? I see from your posts that you had to ask if it was OK to buy it, kind of strange for a guy who changes gear as often as you must. I'll give you a year, we'll see another system listed under David99 (don't forget to take the old ones out-Dahhh vern) Why don't you have your good friend help you set up a system, I could give you some advice if that would help. BTW, thanks for the Pity, TROLLBOY.
No,this thread was not started to be a 'troll' post.
All I wrote is what I experienced.
Why are Krell owners so defensive?
If you were secure with your Krell I dont think you would be so defensive.
When I think of Krell,I think of Bose.
Over priced and over hyped.
If you dont mind paying for the the very high cost of marketing and ads for your Krell (like Bose) thats your business.But try not to be so insecure and defensive.Its all too obvious.
sogood51... "David99 needs to be the one to actually listen" I did listen.
Oh, one more thing I forgot to mention. Your friend must be smarter than you! He's still got the GIANT KILLER and you've got what you've got.
Sogood51, if all you have in response is irrational "junk talk," I guess that I have nothing more to say. It's your loss here, not mine, not David99's. No harm no foul, just trying to drop some knowledge, to use the parlance of our times, nothing more. If imaginary listening sessions suit some Krell owners, so be it, but please conduct them with a trace more respect for your fellow audiophool, as the personal and character attacks are more then a bit childish. Afterall, you don't want to tarnish the Krell Owner stereotypes, right....
Socrates, tarnish the Krell owner's stereotypes? and what are those? It sounds like you have some of those same stereotypes as dave, you know: Pity, Bose, numb nuts, you GIANT KILLER guy's are a class act all the way. If the other Krell owners did not read TROLL post here then thats fine, I did. People on this and other forum's slam amps all the time, thats fine with me, if a person does not like Krell products or any other product made by any company out there, who cares? I did not post just to stick up for Krell amps, I read all the posts as I would any other with an open mind. David99 is a Krell basher all the way, it's not rocket science to grasp. ALL TROLL posts, no matter what product will get input from me if I spot them. FWIW, 99% of people who don't like Krell are not TROLL's looking to bash, they just don't like Krell's sound, I can understand that and thats fine with me. Your responce to me only brings up the fact that (birds of a feather/due flock together). As far as the NAD goes, it could very well sound better than the Krell to lots of people, you seem to own one, is it the best sounding amp you own? Does it smoke your PS Audio? Do you think my Onkyo M-504 could smoke the NAD and your PS Audio? You seem to be SOCRATES on what a real GIANT KILLER is and sounds like, I'm just an imaginary Krell listener anyway and anyone who does not agree with you is just a irrational "junk talker". NAD takes on the KRELL BEAST 1800 vs. 6700?? Hey guy's, I always knew KRELL was over priced, over hyped, Bose junk, If you don't beleave me, just ask Socrates.
Socrates says that Krell owners are sensetive and any response they make to people who denegrate their equipment of choice is motivated by childishness. It's fine for him and other Krell bashers to conduct their attacks while anyone who responds is of questionable intelligence. The implication is anyone with enough money to buy Krell equipment is too stupid or of such impared hearing that they cannot tell how bad it sounds.

Isn't it incredible that all these Krell owners have no sense of hearing, but they coincidentally have the money to buy it. What exactly is the connection between money and hearing loss???

Why don't people who have money enough to buy Krell want a good sounding system too???

As a struggling ahdiophile who has scraped and saved to buy the equipment that I know sounds better than the other things I have owned and auditioned, I have a hard time not insulting the people who attack my hearing, and intelligence, and maturity, but I'm trying to refrain from doing so.

I am a small business owner who is struggling to get by and make ends meet, but I'm too stupid to be able to hear and buy quality audio gear!?!

I've listened to NAD and ignored it because it is not worthy of serious consideration! If you can't afford to buy good equipment, by all means go ahead and buy NAD or Sansui, or Bose, and Von Schwiekert.

I sincerely apologize for not having the wisdom, hearing, and insight to buy the same things you own. Maybe someday soon I will grow up or develop enough as a listener to appreciate everything you think is better.
What Drivel! I'm outta here, I have much better things to do then teach listening and apparently reading skills as well to children....