KrellKCR-HR vs Krell EVO 202.
Krell KRC-HR is almost a legendary Pre-amp. I'v had it for a while but since my evaluation of Krell 350 MC modified took some time I wanted them to be fully broken in. Then compared to Gryphon Antilieon Signatur before I started to use the modified preamp KRC-HR.
Now I'v been trying to fit KRC-HR into the rack. It's actually quit difficult.
External power supply.
Hard to make the cables to reach it.
KRC-HR is upgraded with new modern components. They are actually better quality than the original ones. Therefore, after break in, it should sound better than the original ones. That's not possible to evaluate but i should be that way.
The first hour clearly showed differencis. The first obvious thing was that there was a lot more power in the bottom end and very articulated as well with KCR-HR. Impressive. I would not have excpected that.
I know this is early to make conclusions but the differences are substantial. And mostly positive I think.
KRC-HR is like och a young fruity flower and the EVO 202 is more like grown up, settled down and with no excessiveness at all. 202 is more what some people should call "correct".
KRC -HR helps the musik out and the dynamics are great in all frequencies. Everything "pops" out from the speaker with more energy.
How could it be like that? I'm a bit confused. Can KRC-HR really match up with 202???
Hmmmm. KRC-HR is pure class A. Could that be the reason?
I have to break it in several hours more to see what happens.
--------------------------------------------------------
Due to my taste I start to think that Krell was better before The EVO-line... It was more musical, more fresh and willing to make music great fun.
Dan d'Agustino probably think so to. His new brand starts from the FPB-series not from EVO-series...