Interestingly, Audionut addresses reliability by claiming ownership of several Krell models over ten years. I'm wondering what has prompted him/her to change so often? Reliability or old technology? The thread question emphasized reliability (which should be quantifiable) and not an audionut's subjective impressions on how an entire electronic product line sounds. I don't place too much stock in Stereophile's subjective classifications. But the last two McIntosh amps reviewed (one tube and one SS) were placed in the A groupings along side of Krell and others. Regarding reliability, I believe that I'm correct in stating that McIntosh has been in business longer than most or all of the above mentioned mfrs., including Krell. And of course, all true audiophiles (since there are no standards, what does that mean?) know that the many thousands of McIntosh customers over the decades do not have the sensitive golden ears required to select a product such as Krell. BTW, I own both Mac and Krell and have found them both to be reliable and enjoyable.
Most reliable equipment manufacturers
I would like to know people's opinions as to which are the mist reliable manufacturers. In my book, reliability means: first and foremost, reliable and continued performance of the equipment over an extended period of time, but it also includes quality of workmanship, manuals/ease of use/design, shipping materials, upgradeability, customer service, choice of dealers, etc. For instance, in my experience I give Thiel an A rating, Sony a C.
- ...
- 23 posts total
- 23 posts total