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
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
>