NAD takes on the Krell Beast 1800 vs 6700??

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.

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.