Some of this has already been addressed recently. Look at a couple of posts below labeled: Levinson vs. Classe and Plinius SA-250 or Mark Levinson/Krell/Mc
12 responses Add your response
Ok. Great question. I had a krell ksa 150 and that sounded awesome, That series was warmer sounding compared to the new series. I sold my krell for a Mark Levinson 331 And I had that midrange magic your looking for. Then I had the chance to sell my 331 and buy a 335 and that my freind is when the magic really happened. What an improvement over the older series. The old 300 series Levinson was awesome then and the new 300 series is awesome now in every way. One complaint people would have with levinson was that it didnt have the slam the krell had well now it does. All krell has is slam no refinement at all. Tkae it from me I have owned them both. How many times have you heard that the levinson midrange is like LIQUID? Well it is. As far as the classe goes great stuff not as good of sound. They gear their products to sound to warm, warm is good to warm gives a false presentation. One thing to remember is Levinson pulls you into a performance and krell spits it in your face now you decide. Good luck What speakers are you using?
As it turns out, I've had the chance to compare Classe 401, ML 336, and Krell FPB300 in the last two months. If you're looking for the smooth midrange, ML is the one. Classe didn't seem to have the imaging depth (I've found this to be true for all Classe stuff when compared to higher-grade amps). I have to disagree with Lev335 regarding the slam factor though. While the ML had reasonable slam, it was simply not the equal of the Krell in that department. By comparison, I found the ML "soft-sounding" even though it had more power (350@8 vs. 300) and a true dual-mono architecture. I would also say in general that the Krell's "lack of refinement" is overstated. Not quite as refined as the ML in the mids and highs, but to suggest it has none at all is simply not true. Good luck!