Krell Evo 402e vs Evo 400 mono and Evo 202/Phantom


Martin Colloms raved in Hificritics about the Krell Evo 402e amplifier, as did Andrew Robinson in Home Theater revieuw. I got a great deal for a Krell 400 mono (not the e series however). How compare these to each other.

Have also a deal for a Krell pre Phantom against Evo 202.
Anyone have thoughts about these, please.

They should replace my around 20 years old Krell KSA 150/KRC 2, which, after recapping recently, works absolutely fine.

Thanks guys!
I don't know the newer products you are concerned with, but the KSAs are true classics which many say were the best products Krell evermade. If you can afford to keep them I would no matter what you do next.
I have had the 403 and now the 403e, I was also lucky enough to be @ Krell's demo of the 402 v 402e @ CES a couple years ago, the 'e' series are much smoother and cleaner, everyone in the room was equally impressed.

FWIW I have also owned a KSA 300 s and find the new 'e' series Evo's far more musical.

I have not compared the 400 mono's to the 403 or 403e however
Thanks for responding!
Said that the improvement from the non e to the e series is far greater in the stereo than in the mono Krell evo amps, however not sure about moving from the stereo e (evo 402e) to mono non e (evo 400).
I think I had to make the plunge, as having no posibilities to compare.
hi, sequence 56!
i plan to update my system too.
did you get any info re evo202 versus phantom (without crossover option). please share if so. what is better option from $$ - money point of view?