Upgrading to summits?

[Rich]

The Summit is rated at 91db efficiency, with a much improved X-Stat panels, and an internal amplifier driving the bass. There is no reason for monster powerhouse which is the hallmark of the Krell FPB series. Let's see, the 'baby' in the FPB series weighs in at a whopping 300wpc! That's WAY overkill for driving just the panels alone. So, yes, the Summits will waste the amp's capability!

Spike

I have to respectfully disagree with this statement. Yes, the Summits are 91 db efficient, but that doesn't exactly make them a horn speaker now does it? I have two words for you: Dynamic Headroom. When the volume is turned up and that cymbal crashes, or that guitar chord is struck with authority, you have to have an amp with lots of headroom to accurately portray those dynamic transients. Do you necessarily need 300 wpc or more to drive the Summits? No. Is it helpful to have that headroom for a neutral and accurate presentation of the musical signal? Absolutely. Will the Summits waste the Krell amps capability? Are you joking? Of course, not.

I have 130 wpc of tube power driving the panels on my Ascents. Could I get by with just 30 wpc? Sure. Would I be anywhere near as happy with the result? I seriously doubt it, despite some opinions to the contrary by other members of this forum. I listen to music loud, and I like my dynamics and musical transients to sound lifelike, and there is nothing like a little headroom in the amp to give you that.

You also seem to infer that watts per channel is the only spec that matters with these amps. And since they put out so many watts, they are wasted on the Summits. Give me a break. The Krell amps are well-designed Class A solid-state amps which are capable of bringing out the best in any speaker. These amps will take complete control of the Summits' panels and push them to the full extent of their capabilities, reproducing neutral, lifelike sound with incredible precision and detail. I can't imagine too many people that wouldn't be happy with the result, except for a few that are so stuck on the sound of tubes that they wouldn't consider any solid-state amp for Logans.

 

[DTB300]

I can't imagine too many people that wouldn't be happy with the result, except for a few that are so stuck on the sound of tubes that they wouldn't consider any solid-state amp for Logans.

I always liked the sound of the KSA models, but do not like the sound of the FPB models - just my preferences. I need to get out and hear the Evolution line and see what they are about. People should listen to the Krells to make sure they like the sound signature or not.

Yet, there are people who prefer the sound of Tubes over the sound of SS, even Class-A SS. With my full range CLS panels, I just could not find a Tube Amp which controlled the panels and had a sound I liked with them compared to my Plinius. But I did have an open mind, and I did try both ends of the amplification spectrum. Good thing there are choices out there for all of us.

Dan

 

[Spike]

HsvToolFool: Nobody puts 300+ watts of power through a speaker.
Rich: Do you necessarily need 300 wpc or more to drive the Summits? No.

If both of your answers converge to "NO", then would a 150wpc amplifier from the same manufacturer be a better fit? For example, if Krell had a 150 wpc "FPB150", would this 'baby Krell' be a better amp for the Summits than the FPB300? Let's even the playing field by saying that both Krells are made using the exact same power-supplies, except that the baby Krell has less output devices. If the answer is YES, the baby Krell will sound the same, then why have all the extra output devices? Would they be 'wasted'? If your answer is NO, then that means you really need the FPB300 to drive the Summits in order to give you the desired sonic signature. Does this contradict with your statement that you don't need 300wpc for the Summits? I'd venture to say that given this scenario, the baby Krell may sound better than the bigger brother just due to the fact that there are much less components in the signal chain to mess up the output signal. If you want to keep all parameters as close as possible, do try to listen to the legendary Krell KSA-50 or KSA-100 and compare with the newer FPB series.

I have two words for you: Dynamic Headroom.
Is it helpful to have that headroom for a neutral and accurate presentation of the musical signal? Absolutely.

Ok, let's do some real measurements here, shall we? I'll use my "less-than-efficient" ReQuest panels for these calculations. My ReQuests are rated at 90db, and we all know the ReQuest panels are a couple of generations older than the X-Stat of the Summits. Theoretically, with 32 watts on tap, I should be able to get 105db from 1 speaker at 1 meter. I confirmed the measurement using my RadShack SPL meter this morning. 105db+ out of 1 speaker, driven strictly by one 50watt SixPac monobloc. It's also interesting to note here that at my listening position 12-feet away (4 meters), the same speaker gives 101db+ reading. Only -4db drop due to the ReQuest being a line-source rather than point-source. So, with 2 speakers going, I registered 104db+ on my SPL from the pair of SixPacs alone! Also keep in mind that the SixPacs are driving the panels AND the woofers for this exercise, while the Summits have the internal bass amplifiers, reducing the toll on the amps driving them. I don't know about you guys, but 104db is plenty loud for me and I was able to get there with a pair of 50-watt monoblocs. So, I failed to see how "headroom" becomes a factor in this specific scenario or how a 300wpc amp can provide more headroom over the SixPacs.

Oh WAIT, but I DO have a 300wpc amp laying around! Let's do some more measurements, shall we? New configuration: ML ReQuests driven full-range by Classe' CA-300 @ 300wpc. I registered 112db+ and it was VERY uncomfortable. I'd NEVER want to even come anywhere close to this level. I'm pretty sure the CA-300 has more to go but I'd never use it.

But wait a minute, I just happen to have its little brother, the Classe' CA-150 also! Why not put it through the paces? Another configuration: ML ReQuests driven full-range by Classe' CA-150 @ 150wpc. I also got 112db on the RadShack SPL at my listening position.

So, what have we learned? Strictly speaking number-wise, the 150wpc will push the limits of your ears and the extra devices are wasted in the bigger amp. But in reality, the bigger amplifier has a much better power-supply circuitry and better quality components making the sound more 'effortless' when comparing the Classe' brothers. The SixPacs have huge power-supplies but that's another story by itself. So, the trick is to find an amplifier with good power-supply impelementation, but with the minimum number of components to serve your need. THAT is very hard to do!

For my ears which max out around 99db before pain sets in, 50watts for the panels are more than enough and I still have some headroom left to go.

I have 130 wpc of tube power driving the panels on my Ascents. Could I get by with just 30 wpc? Sure.

I spent a couple weeks with the ARC VT100 (100wpc) in my system, comparing it with the SixPacs and found that the ARC gave hints of running out of steam when pushed. The midrange hardened and the highs becamed edgy. But the SixPacs at half the wattage rating didn't seem to break a sweat! Go figure.

You also seem to infer that watts per channel is the only spec that matters with these amps. And since they put out so many watts, they are wasted on the Summits. Give me a break.

No, you missed my point. Watts-per-channel is only an indication that there are more devices in the signal chain to mess things up. If you don't need those devices to begin with, then why have them in the signal chain to distort your signal at all? Remember that an amplifying device makes a copy of the original signal and output this copied signal to the next stage. The original signal is thrown away. Following this rationale, the copy of a copy of a copy is never as good as the original. You ALWAYS lose something during the copy of analog signal and this is EXACTLY what we're talking about. And we have not even started on the noise issue, noise putting onto the signal path from each device in the chain. So, keeping the number of copies and the number of components to the minimum is a good thing in my book.

I can't imagine too many people that wouldn't be happy with the result, except for a few that are so stuck on the sound of tubes that they wouldn't consider any solid-state amp for Logans.

For this post, it's strictly about numbers and engineering practice. I have left out the tube-vs-solid-state or any other personal preferences. Let's just agree to disagree on those fronts.

Cheers,
Spike

 

[roberto]

I always liked the sound of the KSA models, but do not like the sound of the FPB models - just my preferences. I need to get out and hear the Evolution line and see what they are about. People should listen to the Krells to make sure they like the sound signature or not.

Yet, there are people who prefer the sound of Tubes over the sound of SS, even Class-A SS. With my full range CLS panels, I just could not find a Tube Amp which controlled the panels and had a sound I liked with them compared to my Plinius. But I did have an open mind, and I did try both ends of the amplification spectrum. Good thing there are choices out there for all of us.

Dan

Hola...this is what I really like from our forum. We can agreed or disagreed without loosing our friendship, as the one that I have with dear friend Dan. To my ears, tube sounds better and I have not found any SS that could drive my CLSIIz panles as my Sonic Frontiers power 2 amp. As Dan said, it is our liking and not necessary yours. I also have an open mind and still make a lot of comparisons with great sounding amps. I like the cymbal with the drummer, usually at the back of the stage. With tube amps it is easier to get this, because usually they are less bright than SS and this does not means that they lack of highs. The best is, experiment and listen carefully different type of program material and choose the one that you liked most. Happy listening,
Roberto.

 

[discocarp]

Hey guys, I just wanted to let you know that I'm kind of staying out of the discussion at the moment. Its way over my head. HOWEVER, I am reading this all and learning a LOT! Thanks and please keep it up!

 

[DTB300]

Hola...this is what I really like from our forum. We can agreed or disagreed without loosing our friendship, as the one that I have with dear friend Dan.

Yes, Roberto and I have had some great discussions about tube and ss amps with private emails. We have come to appreciate what each other is looking for in the way of sound.

I like the cymbal with the drummer, usually at the back of the stage. With tube amps it is easier to get this, because usually they are less bright than SS and this does not means that they lack of highs.

This is one area where Roberto and I differ in our tastes. Most of my live listening is done at small intimate clubs sitting close to the band. Roberto likes to sit further back in a larger room setting.

For me, at the clubs I attended the musicians were positioned pretty close to each other. I find most Tube Amps put the drummer TOO far back on the sound stage - almost as if the group is playing in a large symphony hall with the group on the front of the stage, and the drummer way in the back.

Now, which is right and which is wrong??? Neither - personal preference.

In reference to the high end: Some Tube amps can sound very rolled off in the highs, where others can sound really good. Some SS amps can sound very bright and edgy, while others can sound really good.

In reference to the low end: I never found a tube amp that could control my CLS panels properly, compared to the Plinius. I prefered the low end and control of the panel better with the Plinius.

Again, each of us have to decide which we like best with each product.

Dan

 

[roberto]

Yes, Roberto and I have had some great discussions about tube and ss amps with private emails. We have come to appreciate what each other is looking for in the way of sound.


This is one area where Roberto and I differ in our tastes. Most of my live listening is done at small intimate clubs sitting close to the band. Roberto likes to sit further back in a larger room setting.

For me, at the clubs I attended the musicians were positioned pretty close to each other. I find most Tube Amps put the drummer TOO far back on the sound stage - almost as if the group is playing in a large symphony hall with the group on the front of the stage, and the drummer way in the back.

Now, which is right and which is wrong??? Neither - personal preference.

In reference to the high end: Some Tube amps can sound very rolled off in the highs, where others can sound really good. Some SS amps can sound very bright and edgy, while others can sound really good.

In reference to the low end: I never found a tube amp that could control my CLS panels properly, compared to the Plinius. I prefered the low end and control of the panel better with the Plinius.

Again, each of us have to decide which we like best with each product.

Dan

Yes Dan. I agreed with you 100%. I could not say it better. Everything it´s a matter of liking and also setting. Of course, many things could affect your sound performance and the sound through your own system. I have stopped of making comparisions and now I am just enjoying my system and the musician(s) playing for me at my room (lol)...I wish to all, happy listening,
Robertol.

 

[DTB300]

YI have stopped of making comparisions and now I am just enjoying my system and the musician(s) playing for me at my room (lol)...I wish to all, happy listening,

Same here Roberto...I am enjoying the sound of music from my system, especially after all the room treatments that I have done.

Room Treatments: The corners in my room have just been completed (last weekend) for treatment from floor to ceiling. This has made a big difference in the sound in my room. Before last weekend, I had treatments in the corners from the floor 4 ft. up, yet the upper part (3ft+) was still exposed. When I finished off the entire corner, floor to ceiling, the sound improved even more. A great improvement for very little cost.

I am considering replacing my first reflection treatments (sidewall) which is now Auralex 2" Wedge with some Bonded Acoustical Cotton. Still reading absorption reports and finding products out there to consider.

Dan

 

[jjqiv]

As for the rest, this is devolving into yet another Tubes-vs-
Solid State slash Romance-vs-Realism debate. So we'll just
agree to disagree and move on.

Not not a tubes vs. SS debate per se. I have not heard the top Krell stuff in a few years. If they are continuing with the house sound, to my ears, Krell offers a dry, agressive, etched, leading edge, in you face type of presentation. They can give you an initial wow, but it becomes fatiquing. Specially, if its Krell equipment from the front-end to amp. There is more to music than PRAT. Tonal richness, body, harmonics. What sounds more real to me differs.

To my ears, there are other SS amps that I would choose if I went that route. PASS, BAT, Classe, Edge, etc. I have never heard the Blue Circle hybrids, but they sound promising. There are other other hybrids in current production as well.....

I guess my main point, it you should get and listen to some gear before you plunk the money down on the table. Different stuff appeals to different people. And, over times a person's tastes can change.

I own an Aragon 8008X5 amp. Its on the Krell end of the spectrum. I think its great for HT excitement and drive. It can really make a pod racer roar!

 

[jjqiv]

So, what have we learned? Strictly speaking number-wise, the 150wpc will push the limits of your ears and the extra devices are wasted in the bigger amp. But in reality, the bigger amplifier has a much better power-supply circuitry and better quality components making the sound more 'effortless' when comparing the Classe' brothers. The SixPacs have huge power-supplies but that's another story by itself. So, the trick is to find an amplifier with good power-supply impelementation, but with the minimum number of components to serve your need. THAT is very hard to do!

For my ears which max out around 99db before pain sets in, 50watts for the panels are more than enough and I still have some headroom left to go.


I spent a couple weeks with the ARC VT100 (100wpc) in my system, comparing it with the SixPacs and found that the ARC gave hints of running out of steam when pushed. The midrange hardened and the highs becamed edgy. But the SixPacs at half the wattage rating didn't seem to break a sweat! Go figure.



Cheers,
Spike

Yes, the Six Pac's really do sound like a powerhouse of an amp unless you really push them to stupid levels. They've got muscle, body, and finese.

Hey, but stupidly loud can be fun. Its a trade-off. I usally save cranking the punk/punk rap kind of stuff for the car.

 

[HsvToolFool]

Spike, you are wilfully side-stepping to an irrelevant issue.

The FPB-series (and very likely the new Evolution-series)
are world-class, reference-level, cost-no-object amps
regardless of their power rating. Like any "Class A"
gear, these amps are fully capable of placing you in the
original acoustic space.

No matter how simple and low-power a second-tier or
borderline top-tier amp may be, the bottom line is that
a time-tested, widely recognized upper-eschelon amp like
the FPB is a totally different league of performance. There
are lower-power amps which ARE in the same league, but
they don't cost five grand.

If you're really hung up on this power rating thing, you
should ask Mr. D'agostino why his reference-level amps
use such overkill power. I'm sure he does it for absolutely
no reason. Which is also probably why BAT makes the
VK-600 and VK-150, when the VK-220 and VK-75 are
perfectly adequate for any speaker.

Few high-end brands draw more audio-bigotry than Krell,
Transparent, and Martin Logan. I'm accustomed to the
cone-and-dome crowd's disdain for Martin Logan. And
absolutely everyone, everywhere rags on Transparent.

But it's amusing when ML owners, who themselves have
"over-priced, gimmicky, boutique" gear, are irrationally
pre-judged against cost-no-object gear like Krell.

The beauty of Martin Logan 'stats is that they work with
the best front-end gear available despite being so
affordable. As you upgrade, the sound gets that much
closer to real. The speaker isn't holding the system back.

By the way, I auditioned a used KSA-50 before I got my
FPB. There's more romance attached to that amp than it
deserves. It was ground-breaking for the early 80s, but
it's an understatement to say they're not as refined or
solid as the FPB-series. They also run hot enough to be a
fire hazard. Scary actually.

Now if you'll excuse me, my pre-owned BAT VK-D5SE CD
player arrived today. I must install the tubes (ahem) and
see if it sounds as good as I remember. I auditioned it with
Krell amps many moons ago.

 

[twich54]

Now if you'll excuse me, my pre-owned BAT VK-D5SE CD
player arrived today. I must install the tubes (ahem) and
see if it sounds as good as I remember. I auditioned it with
Krell amps many moons ago.

Look'in forward to the review Brian !!

 

[Spike]

Spike, you are wilfully side-stepping to an irrelevant issue.

The FPB-series (and very likely the new Evolution-series) are world-class, reference-level, cost-no-object amps regardless of their power rating. Like any "Class A" gear, these amps are fully capable of placing you in the original acoustic space.

Hmm, I must be going senile in my old age for I have absolutely no idea how I was side-stepping the issue. I remember constructing my argument carefully by using the "world-class, reference-level" Krell FPB-series to illustrate the part-counts affecting the sonic signature. I deliberately used your Krell FPB-300C and a hypothetical FPB-150 (if one exists) in my example and that is still considered side-stepping? Here's an excerpt from my previous post:

If both of your answers converge to "NO", then would a 150wpc amplifier from the same manufacturer be a better fit? For example, if Krell had a 150 wpc "FPB150", would this 'baby Krell' be a better amp for the Summits than the FPB300? Let's even the playing field by saying that both Krells are made using the exact same power-supplies, except that the baby Krell has less output devices. If the answer is YES, the baby Krell will sound the same, then why have all the extra output devices? Would they be 'wasted'? If your answer is NO, then that means you really need the FPB300 to drive the Summits in order to give you the desired sonic signature. Does this contradict with your statement that you don't need 300wpc for the Summits? I'd venture to say that given this scenario, the baby Krell may sound better than the bigger brother just due to the fact that there are much less components in the signal chain to mess up the output signal. If you want to keep all parameters as close as possible, do try to listen to the legendary Krell KSA-50 or KSA-100 and compare with the newer FPB series.

There are only Krell and Martin Logan mentioned in that argument. I don't see any second-tier or borderline top-tier product mentioned anywhere in that argument and I don't see any Krell-bashing statement at all. The rest of my post deals with numbers and measurements from my amplifiers to address the issue of headroom. Which part of my post indicated that I was hung up on the power-rating? At the end of the day, everything translates to loudness which is the measurement at the listener's position and how loud one can tolerate. This loudness level is a direct function of speaker sensitivity and amplifier output. For a 93db efficiency speaker, you obviously need less power than say an 87db rated speaker, which is why there is a wide range of power amplifiers on the market. Depending on one's preferences, each speaker will have a "sweet spot" of amplification power/quality that will fit its owner's goals. Obviously, my system and goals are vastly different than yours and we've agreed to disagree on those fronts already.

If you're really hung up on this power rating thing, you should ask Mr. D'agostino why his reference-level amps use such overkill power. I'm sure he does it for absolutely no reason. Which is also probably why BAT makes the
VK-600 and VK-150, when the VK-220 and VK-75 are perfectly adequate for any speaker.

TRUE, I have never talked to D'agostino, but I have exchanged emails with Victor Khomenko of BAT and he confirmed that his best, reference amplifier was the VK-75 (pre-SE days), and that the VK-150 were monobloc version of the same amplifier should one need more power at the expense of slightly less refinement. Let's pick on the 150 watter VK150 monobloc then. Why did Victor pick this particular amplifier while is has less power than the VK500 (at that time) rated at 250wpc? If more power and headroom is the name of the game, wouldn't Victor pick the 250 watter to be his 'reference' amplifier? Need more example? How is it that the puny 18-watter Lamm ML2.1 is the reference (and most expensive) model in the Lamm product line while the Lamm M2.2 is much more powerful at 220-watts.

You're comparing retail $5K amps against retail $10K amps. $5K amps do not perform at the level of $10K amps, not even within the same brand.

No matter how simple and low-power a second-tier or borderline top-tier amp may be, the bottom line is that a time-tested, widely recognized upper-eschelon amp like the FPB is a totally different league of performance. There are lower-power amps which ARE in the same league, but they don't cost five grand.

While we're on the subject of expense and and you brought up the issue of cost-no-object, how is it that the 18-watter Lamm ML2.1 can command $30k MSRP, or that the DarTZeel NHB-108 commands $18k for 100wpc? Does this mean that the Krell are now...second-tier hovering around measly $10k price point? So, how much should a lower-power amplifier cost in your view? We have the Pass X150.5 which is an excellent amplifier in its own right for $5k and we have the Lamm on the other end of the spectrum at $30k. Heck, the Lamm is a tube unit so we won't consider it for this argument. How about the DarTZeel's $18k price tag for 100wpc? So, according to your argument "$5k amps do not perform at the level of $10k amps" then it must follow that "$10k amps do not perform at the level of $20k amps", correct? If that was true, then would the upper-eschelon league commands the admission price hovering around the $20k price tag, thereby making the $10k price-point...borderline top-tier? But then that would contradict with your statement about Krell being in the upper-eschelon, wouldn't it?

Cheers,
Spike

 

[Rich]

I won't bother wasting the space to quote from your above posts, but I totally fail to see your point, especially in relation to this thread. Are you truly arguing that Krell is not considered a top tier component? Sure, there is always something more expensive. By that measure, the Martin Logans would rank just above Bose. I don't believe even folks that don't like the Krell sound would agree with your contention that Krell is not a World Class manufacturer of amps.

Secondly, how is your argument helping the original poster? He can get a $10,000 World Class Amplifier for $5,000. What alternatives can you offer him at or below $5,000 that would, in your opinion, best the Krell in performance? Debate for the sake of debate is fun, but this person is trying to make a big decision and you are, in my opinion, simply clouding the issue. My opinion is that for the money, he is not going to find a better deal on a new solid state amplifier than he is going to get with the Krell. What alternatives are you suggesting?

As for your question about a hypothetical FPB 150 being a better fit for the Summits, the obvious answer is I have no idea. I would have to hear them side by side on music that I know very well. You seem to equate dynamic headroom with how loud an amplifier can play at the listening position. I suggest you do a little research on this topic. It has more to do with an amp's ability to reproduce dynamic transients (simply put: going from quiet to very loud and back to very quiet again in a very short time frame) in a way that captures the realism of a live performance. Amps with headroom reproduce dynamic transients realistically and effortlessly.

Having said all that, I will say this. If Krell made a Class A 150 wpc or 75 wpc amplifier, it may very well sound as good or even better with the Summits than the 300. And it may not. Again, wpc is not the only manufacturing spec that makes a difference. And just saying that more components in signal chain equals poorer sound is quite an oversimplification. If that's all there was to it, everyone would be making 1 wpc single ended triodes.

All this debate is fun, but pretty useless. The bottom line is: what useful alternatives can you offer the original poster who wants to buy a quality amp for the money and doesn't seem to be overly interested in tubes?

 

[Joey_V]

I still dont see an issue here. You have the chance to get top-shelf amps not used, but BRAND NEW! Get it!

Regardless if you end up keeping it or not, you stand to gain money and experience in the end.

A top-shelf Krell is nothing to think about. It may not be the best out there, but depending on system synergy, I can guarantee that it's the best for some out there.

Get the Krell, all this debate isnt going to go anywhere. Trust your ears... but dont let this deal pass you by. A 50% off Krell deal is too good to pass up as you stand to be a winner regardless of if you keep it or not.

Get the Krell, the best one you can buy, and keep it for a few months... then buy a used comparable amp on 'gon and compare. If you end up liking the Krell more, keep it and sell the other one back on the 'gon. You're gaining experience AND you got yourself a good deal from the getgo, even if you sell the Krell in the process.

Get... the... Krell.

 

[Spike]

Rich,

1. I never stated that Krell is not a World Class amplifier. Heck I don't know what "World Class" mean! Brian was equating the Krell FPB300C to be of this category and anything less like the Pass X150.5 at $5k cannot compete with the Krell. Does that mean Pass Labs or Plinius are not "World Class" rated? Why the stated $10k admission price for "World Class"?
2. I completely agree that the original poster will get a better monetary deal going with Krell due to the deep discount. Does that mean the Krell will perform sonically to his taste? That remains to be seen. To suggest dismissing other (lower-powered) amplifiers in the $5k range due to their price tag is ludicrous in my view. The original poster should consider them by auditioning to be aware of the various sonic signature of the offerings on the market.
3. What alternatives am I suggesting? Pass, Plinius amongst the ones listed.
4. Dynamic transient, going from quiet to loud and back down to quiet again. Isn't that called...SLEW RATE? You can get very agressive slew-rate with a 10-watt amplifier as well as with 300-watt amplifier.
5. The solid-state approximation of single-ended-triode is... FirstWatt by Nelson Pass.

Cheers,
Spike

 

[IWalker]

Used gear of other brands will approximate the value of getting new krell gear half off...so that makes this decision much less of a no-brainer. Now that the Pass .5 series is out, you can get a X250 for around $2500 or so (less than half of the initial retail)...and it is a great piece of gear. It matters very little towards resale value if you've used the piece for 2 months or 2 years...if it's in good condition and used, the price will be similar. So, find the gear you want, get it lightly used...and you get the best of both worlds.

Just saying that Krell does not sound like a particularly musical "match" with ML gear, isn't slighting the brand. It just means that its particular characteristics might not compliment the Logans' characteristics. But, again, it's personal preference. All the middle end krell stuff I've heard sounded bright and fatiguing. Haven't heard any high end stuff. Love the pass labs stuff I've heard, and have heard great things about the plinius stuff as well.

A Pass X250 or a plinius SA-102 (or 103) on audiogon would do very nicely...and would be far preferable (for me) over similarly priced krell gear (comparing used price to the half off new price) Just another OPINION though.

 

[jjqiv]

Used gear of other brands will approximate the value of getting new krell gear half off...so that makes this decision much less of a no-brainer. Now that the Pass .5 series is out, you can get a X250 for around $2500 or so (less than half of the initial retail)...and it is a great piece of gear. It matters very little towards resale value if you've used the piece for 2 months or 2 years...if it's in good condition and used, the price will be similar. So, find the gear you want, get it lightly used...and you get the best of both worlds.

Just saying that Krell does not sound like a particularly musical "match" with ML gear, isn't slighting the brand. It just means that its particular characteristics might not compliment the Logans' characteristics. But, again, it's personal preference. All the middle end krell stuff I've heard sounded bright and fatiguing. Haven't heard any high end stuff. Love the pass labs stuff I've heard, and have heard great things about the plinius stuff as well.

A Pass X250 or a plinius SA-102 (or 103) on audiogon would do very nicely...and would be far preferable (for me) over similarly priced krell gear (comparing used price to the half off new price) Just another OPINION though.

You don't need to go used to compete, even in you factor in tons of head room. For under 5K, you can pick-up a pair of ASL Hurricanes. They can more than push the big Soundlabs, Wilson's etc.

 

[karma]

HI All,
My bedroom HT system is conceived around B&W 805S speakers. All the speakers in this 5.1 system are based on the 805S. The center is an 805S on its side (the HTM4S) and the SCMS for surounds. I also have dual B&W ASW800 subs. All speakers (except the subs) use 805S drivers and are designed to work as a system. The speakers are outstanding especially the tweeters (and I generally hate tweeters). I think the frequency response of the tweeters is from DC to Light. They are not lacking.

I'm mentioning this system because the fronts are driven by a Krell KAV-3250 (3X250W). In the stereo mode, I have a Krell KAV-280P preamp providing the signal. The 805S tweeter is very revealing yet smooth. It never attacks your ears. Yet, it will certainly reveal the secrets of any amplifier.

My experience with the Krells in this system is good. I think these Krell products are a good buy. They are definitely NOT bright yet they are very revealing and seemingly true to the source material. In fact, I have a hard time characterizing them. They are very neutral no matter how loud you play them. They have great, typical Krell dynamics with no grain. Characterizing my Krell sound is kind of like trying to describe how good water tastes. How would you do that?

So, when I hear others characterize Krell's as bright I have to think something else in the system is at fault. Remenber, I'm a tube guy. I'm very sensitive and disliking of a bright signature. See my signature for my reference system. My Krell's simply don't sound bright. I like my Krell's very much. Of course, if you want a romantic signature, look elsewhere. From my point of view, the best signature is no signature. My Krell's come very close to this ideal.

Sparky

 

[IWalker]

exactly...with the B&Ws (not what I would generally consider "revealing" ...at least in my auditions) there's a great synergy with the krells, I'm sure. A naturally revealing speaker like logans can get too much of a good thing from the same amp. Again...saying the krells are great amps...but not necessarily the best match for logan panels.

But, again, if you listen and like the sound, then they're great for you. I've heard them, and wasn't impressed. I just think there are better options for the same money, especially on the used market.