NAD takes on the Krell Beast 1800 vs 6700??

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.