Peachtree Nova 150 as a pre only?

@yyzsantabarbara ,  thanks for your response.  It’s never just a simple question in this hobby, lol. Appreciate the details you provided and may be in touch via mail system with other questions about the 300i, if you don’t mind?


@dougsat ,  thank you for letting me know your experience with the Nova 150.   The loop feature slipped my mind and your use of it reminded me that is an option to think about.   My concern is the 150 falling on its face if asked to play up to the next level amplification.  But you have good resolution speakers that would have told you it didn’t work that way.  I’ve had Maggies before and they will show upstream deficiencies pretty easily.   Nice to hear someone has had success with this option via the Nova 150, it keeps things more flexible and cost conscious.  

Yep - I have the Nova 150.
I have been using it as a preamp feeding a Crown XLS 1502 driving a pair of Magnepan LRS. The Nova 150 works just fine for me as preamp. I particularly like the Loop function on the Nova. So, for that I have an IFI Tube buffer that seems to add just the right touch to the overall sound. 

I think it is great but I am also selling it so my opinions may sound crooked. As I type this I am listening to Fela Kuti and it just sounds great on the Thiel CS3.7. The KRELL is very smooth along with what I think is above average power in the bass region. It is a unit that will not give you fatigue. I do not have much prior experience with KRELL but do so with Bryston and I can tell you that it is much smoother than the Bryston, even the Cubed line.

The internal DAC on the K-300i is OK and the ROON READY integration is my favorite of all the ROON READY units I have used. I love the volume adjustment made available on the ROON client. This is done only on the NETWORK source of the internal DAC and it adjusts the analog volume control.

I am currently listening via XLR on my Gustard X26 Pro DAC and it is great with the KRELL as was the Audio Mirror Tubadour III SE tube DAC. I found that tube and Class A really went well with the KRELL. I liked these 2 DACs on the KRELL over my Benchmark DAC3B (which was also good).

I like the sound of my Benchmark stack DAC3B | HPA4 | AHB2 a little more than the KRELL. I think the BM is also smooth sounding but it has more clarity. The KRELL is more rounded. I think most would prefer the KRELL sound. 

The KRELL on the Thiel CS3.7 is a better match than the Benchmark stack. I was using the AHB2 monos in a configuration that it was not ideally suited for (or officially rated). It sounded great but the KRELL is a little bit better with a bit more bass. It seems to fit the Thiel like a glove. A perfect match actually.

I had the KRELL on my KEF LS50's for a few weeks and now replaced that with the Benchmark stack. I prefer the BM stack on the LS50's and the amount of bass was the same on both. I think the KRELL is more flexible with speaker options whereas the AHB2 needs a proper match. Once a proper match I think I would prefer the BM stack by a hair.

I am selling the KRELL because a system that I had planned to do did not materialize and I cannot use an integrated in the office with the Thiel. I need to have the preamp section away from the speakers where my rack and I am sitting. I am getting CODA separates to go into the office. I had the CODA CSiB integrated for a while and it was also a great integrated like the KRELL K-300i. Very similar sound though I think the KRELL is smoother. 

U asked a simple question and look what happened.

@yyzsantabarbara ,  how do you like the 300i with the 3.7?  For the record, I was a Krell whore for many years but that was back in the KSA, MDA, KRC and KBL days.  I had the CS 3.6 for a decade or so.  Never tried their integrated but wonder now that I see yours.

@yyzsantabarbara ,  thanks yyz.  This is where my concerns are and appreciate your candor.  I’m not about to start building big rig 2.0, although the last two pair just in deserve the big rig.  I’m looking to give the secondary system a nudge to give the O/93 or Andra a fighting chance of sounding up to par.  The PT Amp500 was the direction I was leaning for this room but it sounds like I’m wasting time with the 150 as source pre.   Smart move would be upgrading the entire integrated to the next level once I get a good feeling about which speaker works better in this space.  It really needs to stay simple (minimalist) in there since it is the formal living room.

Using the pre-amp section of an integrated is a great way to plug in a good power amp, usually it's just for a short term while you save up for a preamp. It will be OK but a real pre-amp will be better. 

I did that test with my Nova 150 preamp and amp separately. The preamp and DAC were the weakest link on the 150. The amp section was actually pretty good and made me consider the amp500.  I had the 150 for 2 or 3 years. I enjoyed it when I owned it.

@russ69   I hear what you’re saying.  I’m sure it will work but I’m curious as to how good it will sound.  I feel like I read a thread or article somewhere that they (PT) did not perform as well when split apart.  Have searched here and the asylum but can’t find the article for reference.  Now wondering if it may have been in reference to the W4S STI integrated that performed better in unison. 

I have no experience with the Nova 150 but there is no reason it would have trouble doing that job.