200w/ch stereo amps: best 1 for under 2000 used?


Looking to get 2 stereo amps of around 200 watts/channel, and under $2000 used. That puts several amps into contention:
Krell KAV-250a
Byrston 4B ST
Levinson
Classe
Jeff Rowland?
Muse
Boulder?
others?
are there any tube amps to consider in that price and power range?

The amp will be paired with a Sonic Frontiers Line 3 preamp, and drive dynamic speakers that are not too efficient (87 db) with a 6 ohm nomial (4 ohm minimum) impedance, in a fairly large room (16ft x 45 ft x 9 ft)

I'd like to know what people think? I've been generally thinking of the KAV-250a and Bryston, but have seen other amps come up that seem interesting a potentially good value? What do think would be a good buy in the price range and in the application?
lotusm50

Showing 3 responses by redkiwi

I'm plugging the local product here - but a very underrated option in your price range is the Plinius 8200P (which is the power amp part of the 8200). I have been playing with one (hey, they are only USD1,000 here you know - I am thinking of getting three of them) and now that it has burned in, it beats many of the amps that go for USD2000 second-hand. It has recently bettered a Krell KSA100S (smooth, but lacks PRAT and dynamics), a McCormack DNA-1 (just a little too crisp and grainy, but good PRAT), Muse 180 (smooth and easy, but with a soft grain and dynamically constrained), and a Aragon 4004 MkII (not in the same league of any of the above) - and on some difficult to drive speakers bettered a Plinius SA100 MkIII.

Its strong points - neutral-to-warm balance (once run in), excellent PRAT, dynamic and extended. It loses out to the Class A Plinius stuff in terms of smoothness and the last smidgen of resolution - but the PRAT is perhaps superior.

I have to be careful here. One can certainly nit-pick this amp compared with the best. But I am recommending it enthusiastically for how it manages to put soul into the music and gets you playing your whole music collection.
Hi Papertiger

On my side of the road, I reckon that Harry Pearson of The Absolute Sound gave us a lot of interesting stuff to read, but mainly failed to take us in the right direction. Of course the ideal is to reproduce the sound as it occurred when it was recorded - but this gives us no way of prioritising the inevitable compromises in any real world system. I will refrain from commenting in any detail on the various benders he indulged in over the years, which turned out to be not much more than exercises in semantics.

Stereophile trod similar paths, and most of the audio press (particularly the ones on the right side of the road) followed along obediently.

But if you stop listening just for tonality, detail and dynamics, or worse still, for the sounds of sparrows farting outside the recording venue, or trying to tell whether the venue's shape is curved or rectangular - and just listen for how the music's rhythm grips your musical soul and takes you on the ride, you will discover that different systems do that job very differently.

PRAT is an acronym for pace, rhythm and timing, as stated above - but is about how a system gets the timing queues right. It is often misunderstood, particularly on the right side of the road, as relating to bass reproduction - as if that is the only source of rhythm and expression in music.

Whether PRAT is important to you is really a matter of musical values - but in my mind it stands for the most important element in the reproduction of music. Many would disagree with me on this point and argue that correct tonal balance is paramount. But, to use an analogy, a system that has accurate tonal balance (and even detail and dynamics) can still lack accurate PRAT, and is like a great voice on a lousy singer - the sounds made are wonderful, but that does not make it music.

It has been said before, but is worth repeating - many so-called audiophile systems are less musically engaging than the average car radio - for the very reason that PRAT is not well understood by audiophiles.

I like to think I travel both sides of the road. Most of my gear has been from the US and Canada - but the Poms have a point when it comes to PRAT.
Hi Karls

I agree totally - I have never liked either Naim or Linn stuff much. Shame they make this PRAT issue such a dogmatic one, and therefore less well considered in audiphile writings than it should be.