"Krell" is a buzzword

Corn F.B. is right this is like dumping a bucket of chum in shark infested waters.....bloodlust. I have never heard/owned a Krell but will make the observation that the current Stereophile recommended list has 3 Krell amps rated class A, and it seems there is always Krell amps rated class A, so many "professional reviewers" think highly of them. BTW did the president of Krell see the 1950s classsic sci-fi movie "forbidden planet" where the alien master race that left the advanced tech and then died were the "krell"

Megasam: I thought the term Krell preceeded the Forbidden Planet. Krell was the name of a planet with unlimited power in a very early sci-fi serial, perhaps Buck Rogers??? Other old timers may want to help here!! I currently own three Krell products (mono blocks and a three chassis preamp from the late '80's and the KBX cross-over from the early '90s.) I have nothing but high regard for their build quality and service. While I cannot comment on the sound quality of current models vis-a-vis their competition, it has been my experience that audiophiles who are used to the sound of other top push-pull solid state (Levinson as an example) often find the sound of Krell to be dull by comparison. For me, however, they were consistently more natural than the more "technicolor" competitors--more music than hi-fi or to use an old photography analogy, Krell was Agfa to the other solid state's Kodachrome. Tubes, of course, are an entirely different matter. I agree with the sentiment that it is popular to tear down whoever is successful. When visiting London in the late '80s I was surprised to find the same attitude toward B&W speakers in their homeland as we yanks had for the likes of JBL. (I had always thought that B&W made a pretty fine dynamic speaker). Cheers,

Speaking of buzz words: Where is Sluggo? Did he go underground?

I very much agree with the opinions of Sean in this thread. System SYNERGY is the overriding factor in whether a component sounds good in your system. Or not. There is more than one way to skin a cat... The purpose of this thread, to answer those who have raised the issue, is to get this whole thing out in the open. The ultimate goal is not to provide more cannon fodder, but to hopefully bring us all(specifically, the Krell lovers and haters) to some sort of place where we can coexist(we don't have to agree). Maybe we can agree that Krell can be bad in some sytems, and good in others. And to discuss this whole phenomena of the emotions the mere mention of the name "Krell" brings out. In a civilized, ADULT manner. One devoid of anger, hostility, profanity, and cheap shots. I could have easily slid my comments into that other thread. But, I think a clean sheet of paper is a good place to start. One with none of the blood stains of the other. So, my question. Why is there so much anger related to this topic? We don't see this kind of warfare in the tube vs. solid state argument, and that sure should be worse than this debate.

I know this off the original proposed thread. I always thought tweeks were to articulate chracterisics not contradict them. I would think it is better to match equipment with like desings and goals and I never put a piece in my system that didnt sound good on its own. When you mix a harsh peice and a refined piece dont you get the worst of both worlds? You are contradicting what each piece was designed to do well. I am very intersted in hearing your comment on this. I admit I have never heard Krell and I am very open to opinion.