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??
david99

Showing 2 responses by sean

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
>
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
>