Krell Amps and Pre-amps


Are they that good to justify the costs??

I am considering switching to mono amps across my front three channels and a 2 channel for the surrounds in my home theater. All comments welcome.
simancd
krell amps are very good. they are exciting at first but some people get tired of that sound fairly quickly. Levinson is a better sound in my opinion and the reason is because Levinson is much more liquid and transparent compared to the krell and the bass is awesome in the ml products not to mention the soundstage is deeper wider and more convincing than the krell . There are many great companys out there and krell is a great company I just prefer the levinson gear. I go for the most realalistic sound when building a system. best of luck
When one gets to the Krell price range, it's all pretty much a matter of taste. For me, I prefer Krell sound to the Mark Levinson. Several of my audiophile friends are running Krell gear more than a decade old. Krell quality lasts and continues to satisfy for years. The up front cost is higher but amortized over the years of useful service, and considering the proven resale value, it doesn't cost that much more for the highest quality sound.
My question: why are you switching to mono amps as opposed to say the 5-channel Krell or 3-channel Pass Labs or the Theta Digital or BAT VK6200 configured for 5 channels?

I'm interested in what you feel you're gaining by going to monoblocks. The VK6200 really is configured as separate amps in a single chassis with each channel having its own transformer, while the Theta shares a huge transformer for the 5 channels (Theta says they've tested a version of their amp with separate transformers for each channel and the single sounded better with their design).