mesch - I have Focal 836v speakers. When I purchased my speakers both the Pathos Classic One (not MKIII) and Krell S-300i were in the audio store which is partly why I have them now. I never really considered the Pathos an option at the time and the Krell was just out of reach. That's actually why I picked up the Cambridge Audio Azur 840A since it was the piece of gear that I opted against when I made my original purchase.
Pathos Classic One MkIII vs. Krell S-300i
How does one decide which amplifier they prefer?
For a little background, my system started with an Integra 50.1 receiver (still have). My first amplifier upgrade was to add a Yaqin MC-30L integrated tube amplifier to my setup using a switch. The Yaqin MC-30L was clearly an upgrade to the Integra, but also had a very similar sound. My audio journey then took me to a Cambridge Audio Azur 840A that I simply never liked the sound of so to make a long story short I traded it in to a local audio shop and picked up a Pathos Classic One MkIII that I have really enjoyed. The Pathos was once again a clear upgrade to the Yaqin and again had a similar sound. From the Integra to the Yaqin to the Pathos there was never a question about which one sounded better because each seemed to simply be a better version of the previous one.
Enter the Krell S-300i that has really upset the balance of my audio world. It's not unexpected, but the Krell and Pathos have very different sounds and very different sound stages. The Pathos has more pronounced and clear highs and the Krell has more detailed bass (there is a bit of a mid-bass hump that isn't pleasing). In line with the Fletcher Munson Curve, the Pathos sound better at low levels and the Krell starts to move ahead as the volume is increased.
Sometimes I wonder if the majority of my "dislike" for the Krell is simply that it sounds different than the sound that I've had as long as I've had my system. There's some music where the Krell is absolutely superior and some that I clearly don't prefer it. I think the Krell has allowed me to hear difference between Redbook and SACD that I've not heard before and I have greatly enjoyed the sound I get feeding it with the Integra through the home theater bypass feature.
My system is far from being setup ideally, over even well, but that's just the reality of living in a 1,400 sq-ft house. I honestly believe that most of my gear is well above the setup making it somewhat pointless to try and really evaluate them.
I could keep both of the amplifier and have them both connected to my overall system, but they also represent funds that could be used to try out a new pieces of gear.
I realize that this is kind of an open ended question like ramble, but it's a new experience to truly not be able to pick a favorite. In the few A/B tests my wife and kids tend to prefer the Pathos (they also prefer lower listening volumes which make sense) and the Pathos is clearly a better looking piece of gear (WAF), but the home theater bypass feature on the Krell allows it to be fully integrated and could eliminate the switch.
Anyone else have the experience of not being able to choose a clear favorite?
For a little background, my system started with an Integra 50.1 receiver (still have). My first amplifier upgrade was to add a Yaqin MC-30L integrated tube amplifier to my setup using a switch. The Yaqin MC-30L was clearly an upgrade to the Integra, but also had a very similar sound. My audio journey then took me to a Cambridge Audio Azur 840A that I simply never liked the sound of so to make a long story short I traded it in to a local audio shop and picked up a Pathos Classic One MkIII that I have really enjoyed. The Pathos was once again a clear upgrade to the Yaqin and again had a similar sound. From the Integra to the Yaqin to the Pathos there was never a question about which one sounded better because each seemed to simply be a better version of the previous one.
Enter the Krell S-300i that has really upset the balance of my audio world. It's not unexpected, but the Krell and Pathos have very different sounds and very different sound stages. The Pathos has more pronounced and clear highs and the Krell has more detailed bass (there is a bit of a mid-bass hump that isn't pleasing). In line with the Fletcher Munson Curve, the Pathos sound better at low levels and the Krell starts to move ahead as the volume is increased.
Sometimes I wonder if the majority of my "dislike" for the Krell is simply that it sounds different than the sound that I've had as long as I've had my system. There's some music where the Krell is absolutely superior and some that I clearly don't prefer it. I think the Krell has allowed me to hear difference between Redbook and SACD that I've not heard before and I have greatly enjoyed the sound I get feeding it with the Integra through the home theater bypass feature.
My system is far from being setup ideally, over even well, but that's just the reality of living in a 1,400 sq-ft house. I honestly believe that most of my gear is well above the setup making it somewhat pointless to try and really evaluate them.
I could keep both of the amplifier and have them both connected to my overall system, but they also represent funds that could be used to try out a new pieces of gear.
I realize that this is kind of an open ended question like ramble, but it's a new experience to truly not be able to pick a favorite. In the few A/B tests my wife and kids tend to prefer the Pathos (they also prefer lower listening volumes which make sense) and the Pathos is clearly a better looking piece of gear (WAF), but the home theater bypass feature on the Krell allows it to be fully integrated and could eliminate the switch.
Anyone else have the experience of not being able to choose a clear favorite?
- ...
- 19 posts total
- 19 posts total