[gunbir]

Originally Posted by reignofchaos

I find that very very hard to believe that a McCormack can't drive a pair of focus 140 standmounts.

Sure, thats your call friend. But with due respect to Mr. Atkinson, he and I disagree ever so often. So I tend to ignore him every now and then. He isn't complaining, and neither am I.

Originally Posted by reignofchaos

A friend of mine has that krell with a pair of Audience 82 floorstanders and he's dumping it

Please pass my number on to him. Its an awful amplifier. I will take it off his hands. I know it a dirty job but someone has to do it...

[reignofchaos]

Will surely pass on the contact to once he has the Coda in his hands.

[Flying Bong]

Originally Posted by gunbir

My friend, as much as I would like to agree with you here, (unfortunately) I can't...

Originally Posted by reignofchaos

I find that very very hard to believe that a McCormack can't drive a pair of focus 140 standmounts.

Truth is, all of us at SK's place that day would feel the same way - none of us beforehand, expected or wanted the Krell to come ahead by such a large margin (especially me - I'm still shocked at the outcome)

Originally Posted by gunbir

PS. I was also impressed by the Jolida. Very nice CD Player FB...

Thanks Gunbir....really did smoke the Cambridge 840C

Originally Posted by reignofchaos

As for drive issues, its the krell which suffers from that... Even stereophile found that the amp clips with a 4 ohm load. Here take a look
Stereophile: Krell KAV-400xi integrated amplifier

Maybe so...I didn't hear it in this case, but then, I'm not the 'golden-eared' type by a VERY long margin

Interestingly, in the very same review, Wes Philips did not hear any drive issues when pairing the Krell with the Resolution 2s, also a 4-ohm load, but then, hearing is subjective...

Talking of ventilation for the Krell at SK's place, we had simply stacked the components on top of each other, so it would be at a disadvantage, going by JA's recommendations.

[Flying Bong]

The Dynaudio Focus 140 are rather nice speakers IMHO - neutral and detailed but not clinical, also tonally very well balanced to my ears. 'Bright' recordings were evident as such, but not unlistenable...

Dont even want to describe the comparision to the Cadence Aritas , its rather jarring even though the Dyns cost 2.5 times more (retail). The metal dome tweeter of the Cadence is what really lets it down I guess...

[gunbir]

Originally Posted by Flying Bong

Dont even want to describe the comparision to the Cadence Aritas, its rather jarring even though the Dyns cost 2.5 times more (retail). The metal dome tweeter of the Cadence is what really lets it down I guess...

The build quality on the Aritas was insane (considering the price). Made me feel proud to be an Indian. They are nice sounding speakers though. Do compare them with B&W sometime, for a feel good injection.

[Flying Bong]

Originally Posted by gunbir

Do compare them with B&W sometime, for a feel good injection.

Hahahaha, feel better already ....just need to avoid the TD12s and DMT15s

[Autophile]

Originally Posted by reignofchaos

sk the problem with the McCormack vs the Krell is that the McCormack Line drive is not that great a piece of equipment. The Power amp is very very transparent. With a better preamplifier, the McCormack will do much better. Anyway I guess you are all set with the Krell now so just get it :-).

McCormack RLD-1 is surely rated as a good preamplifier in lot of magazines. But the McCormack combo lost the battle miserably to a integrated amplifier which is far cheaper. USD 5000 for McCormack RLD-1 + DNA 225 vs USD 2500 for Krell KAV-400xi.

I am sure if Steve could not design a good preamplifier then why would he be making it and selling it. Moreover the same manufacture can make better preamplifier to match their own power amplifiers to get best out of them. Its like buying a Ferrari and saying its engine is good but it can perform better with some other transmission.

Wish you were there in the listening test then you would have "Heard and Believed"

[Autophile]

Originally Posted by reignofchaos

I find that very very hard to believe that a McCormack can't drive a pair of focus 140 standmounts. I've seen a DNA drive a pair of apogee stage speakers without much trouble. Maybe the amp itself is borked. As for drive issues, its the krell which suffers from that. A friend of mine has that krell with a pair of Audience 82 floorstanders and he's dumping it for a Coda Continuum integrated. Even stereophile found that the amp clips with a 4 ohm load. Here take a look

Stereophile: Krell KAV-400xi integrated amplifier

Its hard to believe for me. There are issues with 400xi if not ventilated properly in case of very low impedance dip like 2 ohms and below when played loud. I think any home audio amplifier will have problems driving those loads especially integrateds.

One of my very good friend's brother is running Krell 400xi with Tannoy System 215 DMT II studio monitors (15" Dual Concentric with 15" Bass driver per side) and they are no easy load by any standard, on top of it the guy listens to it "LOUD". Till date the 400xi has not shut down once because of thermal issues and had shown no signs of clipping.

As far as stereophile and JA is concerned he has mentioned that amp had some problem and he faced the issue while measuring it.

[Pani]

Just my 2 cents:

I have had the opportunity to compare the following amps:
1. Plinius 8200 MkII
2. McCormack DNA-125 (Plinius 8200 as the preamp)
3. Krell 400xi Integrated


The CD Player was a Bluenote Stibbert and the speakers were Dynaudio Contour 1.3SE.

I have heard the Focus 140 and they are nice. But as far as my personal experience goes, the 1.3Se is a far tougher speaker to drive than the 140. They are also much more colourless and neutral compared to Focus-140. Not to mention, a better speaker overall.

The program material was mostly Mark Knopfler, Floyd, Patricia Barber and some reference test CDs.

Here are my observations:
1. Plinius 8200 MKII: A very warm yet punchy amplifier with amazing mids. This amplifier made music. Its not easy express impressions especially when you are not a reviewer and lack those vocabs but I will try. I found Plinius to be smoothest in this group yet uncompromising when it came to dynamics (reference title "Heavy Fuel"). It threw a huge soundstage and lifelike image behind the speaker. Most importantly it gets you hooked to your seat and makes music. I did read somewhere that Plinius + Dyns are a combo made in heaven (I think it was in Audio Asylum) and I wouldnt dispute that much. Though I wouldnt as well agree that Dyns cannot sound better or the Plinius cannot do better with a different partner.
But then, I also found that 1.3SE needs an even better amp than the 8200. I would write more about it in my concluding statements.

2. McCormack DNA-125: It was connected to the pre-amp out of the Plinius 8200. This amp did try to hold on to the Plinius tonality and was successful to a good extent. It also showed up to have a bit more juice than the Plinius and was driving the 1.3Se harder. It was also pretty musical and didnt sound analytical at all. Where it lost out to the Plinius amplification was the smoothness and refinement area. Plinius just sounded like an amp from the next level for the way it provided the same music with amazingly liquid mids and exceptionally grain-free manner. The McCormack sounded like a hard-handed and slightly more grainy amp in comparison. The bass was more in quantity but lost defination(relatively). The softer, subtler emotional touch was lacking. And and and...the soundstange was more infront hence a bit more on the face sound. Everything said, it still sounded musical...which is very important to me.

3. Krell 400xi: I did hear this amp at a different place before with Dyn A82 and yes, it cannot drive it but then I am yet to see any integrated drive an A82 well. With Contour 1.3SE I expected a more happy amp and that it was. Fortunately it also has a Balanced in and the CDP had a balanced out so we tried it out both in balanced and unbalanced mode. First impression....good!!! It sounded more refined than the McCormack and infact matched the Plinius in this area. It was smooth as well. The details were all there. The soundstage though not as huge and lifelike as the Plinius but still great. The tonality was good. I didnt mention all throughout...we did listen pretty loud to all the amps. The Krell DID NOT buckle as well when pushed. then what was lacking ??? To me it made little music. It sounded lean in comparison. The musical pieces were all there but not connected. I could walk out anytime during the audition without feeling hooked to my seat. I am not a very seasoned audiophile and nor did I own 10s of equipments, I was just listening to my inner feeling. I never felt hooked with Krell-Dyn Combo. Music was disjoint and never connected to the listeners there (there were 2 of us). But, everything was clean and nothing much to complain regarding individual aspects.

Concluding, as I said before the 1.3Se needs a better amplification than all of these to perform close to its potential but among the 3 it was Plinius for me by a good margin. Krell did everything fine but never connected me to music the importance of which is the greatest for me in a setup. If its not there I wouldnt care for it. Thats just my opinion.

[Pani]

Forgot to mention:
The Krell did SEEM to be slightly more detailed compared to the other two amps but it also seemed that the feeling was due to its lean and slightly analytical bent in sound. We could not justifiably pin-point any particular piece of tone that the Krell dug out deeper than the other amps (Plinius in particular) but it did present tones more discretely and at the end couldnt bind/present them together as one...that could be the reason it didnt sound as musical to me. On the other hand a short term audition can actually go in favour of the Krell as it sounds very clean, defined and detailed.

BTW, for CDP I would strongly recommend Arcam CD-73/CD-192 depending upon budget.

[Autophile]

Interesting find Pani. I have used 400xi extensively and got chance to compare it head to head with lot of amplifiers costing more and less. Its the best value in the "high end integrated" bracket.

Plinius (9200) was tad warmer but had no control on the speaker whatsoever in comparison to McCormack and Krell.

We were five guys in the test and each one of us have different music tastes. It was quite an extensive listening and A-B session which was extended for 2 days over a weekend.

We used two CD players with two different interconnects with exotic speaker cables and the conclusions were same among all 5 of us, going in favour of Krell.

Comparing apple to apple in this case a 200W amplification. Krell offers best bang for buck and sound quality along with good after sales support. And it is far more cheaper leaving budget for a good CD player and cables.

Krell KAV-400xi - USD 2500
Plinius 9200 - USD 4400
McCormack RLD-1+DNA225 - USD 5000

Rest its upto an individual's taste what one like. If everybody loved Krell then other brands would have closed their shops long back. But to our ears it sounded the best of the lot.

[Flying Bong]

To add to what JB has said:

1. Yes, the Plinius was warm sounding but not only did it lack drive, it surprised me with its bright treble
2. The Krell was more detailed than the McCormack and able to control the speaker better, but also tonally "darker" i.e. voices & instruments had more depth & weight, in fact to my ears, the McCormack sounded leaner in comparison...

[Flying Bong]

Originally Posted by Flying Bong

.....the Plinius was warm sounding but not only did it lack drive, it surprised me with its bright treble

Compared to the McCormack...

Originally Posted by Autophile

Rest its upto an individual's taste what one like. If everybody loved Krell then other brands would have closed their shops long back. But to our ears it sounded the best of the lot.

@Pani/ROC: I agree with JB, appreciation of music/ hi-fi is a very subjective experience...I think we should amicably "agree to disagree" w.r.t. amplifier preferences in this case....

Originally Posted by Pani

.... connected me to music the importance of which is the greatest for me in a setup. If its not there I wouldnt care for it. Thats just my opinion.

That's very well said - to a large extent I'd agree. However, even keeping this in mind, my comparative opinions of the Krell, McCormack & Plinius amplifiers heard by me still remain unchanged.

[Pani]

Hi Autophile, Flying_Bong,
I am absolutely not surprised that you guys liked the Krell as it actually scores well on many attributes of amplification. The thing that really surprises me is:

.....the Plinius was warm sounding but not only did it lack drive, it surprised me with its bright treble

Plinius (9200) was tad warmer but had no control on the speaker whatsoever in comparison to McCormack and Krell.

I have used Plinius for the last 2 years (8100 followed by 8200) and both with Dyns (A52->BM6->1.3SE) and they have amazing control over the speakers. Whether one likes the warm tonality of Plinius or not is subjective but Plinius not controlling a Focus 140 and sounding bright (compared to MCK and Krell) actually makes me feel shocked. Was it a fully broken-in piece or a new equipment ?? As far as I know 9200 is a much better amp than 8200. I have heard the 9200 just once but it was brand new out of the box driving a Focus-220...it did sound bright with not the authority I expect from Plinius but then it was just out of the box..thats understandable. Was it the same in your case ?

The other thing that is bugging me is a DNA-225 not driving the 140 ? An aquaintance of mine drives a Contour S3.4 floorstander through a MCK DNA-1 happily (DNA1 is the previous incarnation of DNA-225 with similar power rating).

Its not about subjective taste in audio that I am trying to discuss out here...I wouldnt do that being an audiophile instead I am amazed with all these conflicts with amp-speaker synergy.

All I can suggest is, try listening to the 140 with a different Plinius and MCK equipment...it could be enlightening for all of us.

[Autophile]

Originally Posted by Pani

Hi Autophile, Flying_Bong,
I am absolutely not surprised that you guys liked the Krell as it actually scores well on many attributes of amplification. The thing that really surprises me is:

I have used Plinius for the last 2 years (8100 followed by 8200) and both with Dyns (A52->BM6->1.3SE) and they have amazing control over the speakers. Whether one likes the warm tonality of Plinius or not is subjective but Plinius not controlling a Focus 140 and sounding bright (compared to MCK and Krell) actually makes me feel shocked. Was it a fully broken-in piece or a new equipment ?? As far as I know 9200 is a much better amp than 8200. I have heard the 9200 just once but it was brand new out of the box driving a Focus-220...it did sound bright with not the authority I expect from Plinius but then it was just out of the box..thats understandable. Was it the same in your case ?

The other thing that is bugging me is a DNA-225 not driving the 140 ? An aquaintance of mine drives a Contour S3.4 floorstander through a MCK DNA-1 happily (DNA1 is the previous incarnation of DNA-225 with similar power rating).

Its not about subjective taste in audio that I am trying to discuss out here...I wouldnt do that being an audiophile instead I am amazed with all these conflicts with amp-speaker synergy.

All I can suggest is, try listening to the 140 with a different Plinius and MCK equipment...it could be enlightening for all of us.

Its true we liked Krell, but that was without any bias against the other two. One of my fav amplifier is Plinius SA102 the one runs on n-p-n configuration. That does not mean that every amplifier coming from Plinius/McCormack/Krell stable has to be good.

It was a healthy A-B comparison done by 5 people with unanimous conclusion and one person out of 5 listeners is actually putting his hard earned money to buy one of them (the one which sounds the best).

We have listened to the reference of each company in a particular category with McCormack combo being odd one out as it was a prepower combo. I don't think that Plinius 9100 and McCormack DNA-125 would have made any difference in the final conclusion.

Power rating is not the only spec to judge an amplifier. Any two amplifier with same power rating and specs can look identical on paper. But they will sound different and control the same loudspeaker differently. What matters is the way amplifier is designed and how good the power supplies are.

One of my friend is using Audience 52 with Plinius 9200 since very long time. He was also shocked after the demo of 400xi. According to him Krell was far superior to Plinius in tonality and control. He said that his speaker's character totally changed and they were full of life.

PS : We have to keep in mind that the Krell is half the price of the other two amplifiers.