Entry level Krell amps
lhf...@lehman.com
I am interested in the KAV150a, but have heard a lot
about the older Krell amps being worth looking at too!
In particular, I am considering the KST100, KSA50s,
and KSA100s. Could any one give me any pointers about
which one to get? I have a pair of Martin Logans Aerius i
and after this amp, I would probably get another identical
amp in the future to bi-amp (when budget allows!).
Thanks,
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Eza and Clark Gadson
fairly familiar with the KST and KSA-50,100,200, and 300s as well as
the KSA-150,250 series. I also own a pair of Martin Logan Sequel II
speakers. You need as much high current drive ability as you can get
to effectively drive the MLs and wattage won't hurt either. As such
I must recommend that you go with one of the older amps, at minimum
the KST-100 (which I owned). I think it is an excellent little amp
for the money, even if it is a little constrained in putting air
around the instruments, particularly in the midrange. The KST would
be a better bet than the KSA-50s which actually sounds better because
the 50s may not quite be up to driving the MLs. If you can pony up
the $$$ go for the 100s you will get both the drive capability and
the sound quality with that amp. If the 100s is a little much you
might wnat to try the older KSA-150, the bigger brother of the KST
and pure class A (the KST was only 50wpc class A). Compared to the
100s it is a furnace and doesn't have the midrange liquidity of its
replacement but is sounds better than the KST and may not cost much
more. I would stay away from the new Krell low priced amps (the KAV
series). I have not had as much experience with them as with some of
the older generation, but I have been unimpressed with my listening
sessions, which included a session with the Aerius. They also do not
appear to be as well built as the older line amps and I don't believe
they have same drive capability.
Good luck
Eza
lhf...@lehman.com wrote in message <73fp22$coe$1...@supernews.com>...
will
including a KSA-200S, a KST-100, a FPB-300, and a KAV-250a, and the
KAV-250a hangs in there with the KSA-200S, they're all outstanding
amps, the KAV series has a tendency to be possibly a little forward
with forward speakers, which the Aerius-i is most definitely not.
I'm not sure if this is necessarily in your price range, but you
might want to take a look at the FPB-200 that is in r.a.m, its almost
half off retail and basically new/w warranty from a dealer at $3800,
and would eliminate the need for bi-amping, its an incredible amp at
a great price...
Scott
would be good choices for your application.The KSA50s might not have
enough power to drive your Martin Logan's correctly.The KSA50s was
said to have one of the sweetest mid-bands of any Krell amplifier.The
issue with the 50s was that it was a little light weight in the bass
and it ran out of steam too easily.The KST100 would be a good choice
first-off because of it's price.At $1300 used,I don't see how you
could go wrong with one.Also,the KST100 can be configured for mono
applications.The sound of the KST100:sweet mid-range,good bass,clear
imaging,and overall unfatiguing listenability.The downside is that the
KST100 can sound a little "zippy" and a little "edgy" sometimes in the
treble.There has been some disagreement on this amp on this newsgroup.
I guess this is because no two listeners hear quite the same.There are
also some known Krell dealers that post on this group.They will say
anything to sell you a new KAV series amp.The KSA100s is also a good
buy due to the price.At $2500 used,you can get a "big"Krell at
reasonable price.The S series of Krell was often criticized as being
too mellow for a Krell.The S series didn't have quite as much slam as
the older Krells.The S series does however,have a much nicer mid-band
and nicer treble region than the older Krells as well as the FPB
series.The S series bass is not at all lightweight by any means.Yes,it
is true that the 100s is not quite a 200s or a 300s.At a fraction of
the price it comes damn close though.I cannot justify spending the
extra cash on a 200s or a 300s for little gain.The law of diminishing
returns kicks in.The KSA100s sounds better to my ears than any KAV
series amp.The KAV series sounds grainy in the mids and doesn't have
the same grunt in the low-end as the 100s.The KAV series are okay,but
I don't think that they are worth the asking price.
Scott
Stewart Pinkerton
>The KST would
>be a better bet than the KSA-50s which actually sounds better because
>the 50s may not quite be up to driving the MLs. If you can pony up
>the $$$ go for the 100s you will get both the drive capability and
>the sound quality with that amp. If the 100s is a little much you
>might wnat to try the older KSA-150, the bigger brother of the KST
>and pure class A (the KST was only 50wpc class A).
This is just not accurate. The KST-100 was an early attempt by Krell to
get into the lower end of the market, and it was a straight class AB
design. It was most certainly *not* 50W class A, and IMO it was easily
the worst amplifier Krell ever made. Best forgotten, and definitely not
a patch on the KSA-50, which was only marginally less powerful in
reality. My KSA-50 mkII actually puts out almost exactly 100 watts into
8 ohms, and 195 watts into 4 ohms.
I would however agree that the KSA-150 and its big brother the KSA-250
(last of the 'true class A' Krells) are excellent designs, and great
value on the used market.
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is art, audio is engineering
Mike
Pinkerton) wrote:
>It was most certainly *not* 50W class A, and IMO it was easily
>the worst amplifier Krell ever made.
I used to own a KST-100. In the manual of my KST it clearly stated
that it ran in class A up to 50 watts. BTW in the used market a KST
can be had for as little as $1200. At this price it is a bargan if you
need that kind of thing on the cheap.
Steve Zipser
I used to sell these amplifiers. WHile I might agree with Stewart's
sentiments about the amplifier's sound, it most definitely was rated to
50 wpc class A.
Cheers
Zip
--
LETS GO PANTHERS
Sunshine Stereo,Inc http://sunshinestereo.com Tel: 305-757-9358
9535 Biscayne Blvd Miami Shores, FL 33138 Fax: 305-757-1367
PASS Rega NOVA Miranda CODA Audible Illusions CEC Camelot Parasound
Audio Logic Chiro Benz-Micro Dunlavy NEAR NHT Gallo Zenith Arcane
Mordaunt-Short EAD Vans-Evers Monster/ENTECH ESP Straightwire MORE!
Lewis Brown
KSA-250 pointed out that this amp only put out approximately 27 Watts of
true class A power (Stereophile, January 1991).
My understanding was that the "S" series was designed to produce the
full rated 8-ohm power in class A. Please correct me if I am wrong.
This audiophile stuff is so complicated, you know.
Regards,
Lewis Brown
Stewart Pinkerton
>On 25 Nov 1998 22:46:28 GMT, pat...@popmail.dircon.co.uk (Stewart
>Pinkerton) wrote:
>
>>It was most certainly *not* 50W class A, and IMO it was easily
>>the worst amplifier Krell ever made.
>
>I used to own a KST-100. In the manual of my KST it clearly stated
>that it ran in class A up to 50 watts. BTW in the used market a KST
>can be had for as little as $1200. At this price it is a bargan if you
>need that kind of thing on the cheap.
My apologies, I was wrong on this. I was misremembering the fact that
unlike all previous Krells, it wasn't class A up to *full* rated power.
The KST-100 is indeed class A up to 50 watts/8 ohm, although the treble
graininess still excludes it from true 'Krellness' for me. I'd save up
for an Adcom GFA-5802 or Aragon 8008, unless you really *must* have the
Krell nameplate!
lhf...@lehman.com
bl...@afm1.law.flinders.edu.au
I have a Krell KST-100 which I use with Duntech Black Knight speakers (3-way,
5 driver design, 90 dB sensitivity, 4 ohm - down to 2.8 ohm). The comments on
this thread seem to confirm my own opinion that this was not such a good
choice. Before the Krell I was using two Pioneer A400 integrated amps (one
dedicated to each speaker) and while these amps are inexpensive the detail
they produced was remarkable. The top end was very smooth. Listening to
certain recordings had my heart racing - something that just doesn't happen
anymore with the Krell. There is less detail and perhaps also the graininess
Steward alluded to. I had thought the differences between the amps was
because the Krell is more revealing of recording deficits when infact it was
the Pioneers that were more revealing. Trouble is now my wife will be most
upset (understatement!) if I say I'm getting something else. Perhaps I can do
a straight swap or trade-in... Perhaps looking into the Adcom and Aragon amp
that Stewart mentions might be the way to go? Or perhaps back to the
Pioneers? Suggestions greatly appreciated!
Cheers,
Nicholas
======
Nichola...@flinders.edu.au