Any NAD folks around here?

[BroonsBane]

<font color='#000000'>I seem to be adrift, alone in a sea of Yamahas, Denons, Hk's etc.
Are there any NAD lovers out there? Hello? echo echo echo...

</font>

 

[jeffsg4mac]

<font color='#000000'>I used to love NAD and have owned 3 amps, 1 preamp, 1 intergrated and 1 early prologic receiver. They all had problems, so I won't buy NAD again. Their stuff today is very overpriced for what you get. There are much better bang for your buck buys out there.</font>

 

[BroonsBane]

<font color='#000000'>For years I have owned the Monitor 1700 preamp and 2200pe power amp. Absolutely no problems with either of them. After I got into home theatre I have bought a variety of receivers over the years but never multi-channel separates. &nbsp;My T763 is the first quality receiver I have owned (bought it in Dec last year) and really like it so far. &nbsp;I still use the old stuff for listening to vinyl. &nbsp;I have read some rather disturbing threads on other forums about poor QC with NAD stuff and I just hope that mine lasts!</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>I used NAD back in '80's. I had an amplifier and a turntable (don't remeber the names). I was fairly satisfied with them. Turntable was not so great( too sensitive, not enough weight, etc.) but the design was cool. Now I would not buy NAD anymore because they are overpriced and what you get from them, you can get with less money from other brands.</font>

 

[RX-V2400]

<font color='#000000'>I have a NAD 7600 (699w into 4 ohm) that I using to drive the front channells of my RX-V2400. Let the Yamaha just handle the souround sound. Very few ampd have the head room of the NAD's - great pure preamps too.</font>

 

[annunaki]

<font color='#000000'>NAD is pricey, but I do not believe it is overpriced. Pop open the chasis on an NAD receiver and compare it to a comparably priced Yahmaha or Denon. I have. You will be thoroughly impressed at the size difference of the transformers and power supply sections. The NAD makes you wonder why the Denon or Yahmaha cost the same amount of money. Ask a Denon or Yahmaha or even an Onkyo to deliver it's rated power with all channels driven simultaneously and the results are laughable in some cases. Not so for an NAD or Harman Kardon. In many instances they will actually exceed their ratings. Some companies overbuild and others just build to spec. Because there is no standard for rating multichannel (more than 2) receivers manufacturers can get by, by putting in a power supply only capable of meeting the FTC spec of two channels driven simultaneously (or in some cases one) thus increasing their profit.

The reason NAD has so called QC problems is because their are less of them out there. It is easier to hear about a problem from 1 in 1,000 owners vesus 1 100,000 owners. Basically what I mean is this. NAD and Yamaha, Denon, ect. all most likely have the same amount of problems proportionally. Yet because there are fewer NAD owners than the &quot;big boys&quot; it is easier to hear about those problems.</font>

 

[BroonsBane]

<font color='#000000'>I would love to see a head to head comparison of unit failures/units sold amongst NAD, Yamaha, etc. I'd be willing to bet that NAD fares no worse, and perhaps better than other brands.</font>

 

[A. Vivaldi]

<font color='#000000'>I wouldn't say I'm a Nad lover, but I own a Nad C-320 BEE integrated and I'm impressed with it so far. It's considered their most refined and best sounding amp from reviews I've read, and it certainly sounds stronger than it's rated 50wpc. &nbsp;Is Nad overpriced? I think anyone would be hard pressed to find a better sounding integrated, or any other type of amp for that matter, for $399. Nad is considered the very bottom of the high-end by enthusiasts and I tend to agree, but they're a step up from mass market stuff like Yamaha, Onkyo, Denon, etc. Speaking of overpriced, Denon's products are pretty far up there. I could buy Rotel for what they're asking for their stuff nowadays!</font>

 

[JAB]

<font color='#000000'>I am considering a second home theater set-up using a NAD A/V receiver. I am currently investigating their latest models, the T773, T763, &amp; T753. As noted, they are one of the few companies that dare to rate their amps 20-20,000 into 8 ohms with all channels driven. So a 100 watt Nad would stand up to the big manufacturers 170 watt amps that are rated with one or two channels driven only. They aren't going to win any beauty contests either, but sound takes top priority over looks in my books.

Also, the pricing on Nad products seems to be quite reasonable, probably because they don't waste money on fancy DSP programs and other bells and whistles. And ,lordy, lordy, you can engage or defeat the LFE output in their pure direct mode (Yamaha, take a lesson!).

Al</font>

 

[drexel86]

<font color='#000000'>I have posted some other requests for advice on purchasing an a/v receiver. &nbsp;I have narrowed it down tween yama 2400 and Onkyo 801R.. i have purchased the PSB Image speakers which also is co distributed with NAD. &nbsp;The dealer said they are a great fit. &nbsp;I think the biggest obstacle right now for everyone is $$$$. The NAD is more , maybe even the price of the DVD player you decide to purchase.. I know that has come across my mind.. I have a good frien that will sell 25% off retail to me , so the NAD 763 is heavily considered. &nbsp;I believe you are correct that NAD usually underates watts p/c &nbsp;as my dealer did bring that point up. But money is an object, therefore decisions are tough . Thanks for everyone's input. &nbsp;Audioholics Aononymous !</font>

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

<font color='#000000'>When I hear a certain type of high-end audio snob dissing a brand as &quot;OK for mid-fi&quot; or &quot;sterile&quot;, or some such codswallop, I tend to assume that it's actually probably very good gear at a realistic price and worth a look. NAD is one of those companies. And a company that rates their stuff conservatively as others have said above is my kind of people!

If economic fortune smiles upon me, I might discard my sub-$1k pre/pro limit mentioned elswhere and take a good look at the S-170i pre/pro. Looks like a good unit for the music-only multichannel system I intend to build.</font>

 

[RX-V2400]

<font color='#000000'>It's late. I'm drunk. I don't know the backgound or the inside details that you talk of, but I do know codswallop. So lay off NAD. It's not the rated power you put up front, it's the reserves you have for when the girl need a maximum climatictic thrust, and only NAD has it.</font>

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>

RX-V2400 : <font color='#000000'>...it's the reserves you have for when the girl need a maximum climatictic thrust, and only NAD has it.</font>

<font color='#000000'>I think you're confusing NAD with &quot;gonads&quot; &nbsp;

</font>

 

[pam]

<font color='#000000'>I remember reading somewhere that NAD was a very good company at first (I remember in 1986 listening to very good sound coming from NAD receiver's).

Then they went down for a few years with bad quality. I think they were either bought or merged...

It seems that they are back in business now and can produce products that are competitive.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Yes!, - I have had NAD for over 15 years, and never had a single failure.
My current system is:
NAD T163 pre/pro
3X NAD THX 261 bridged mono amps (350W)for the front 3 speakers
One NAD 916 multichannel amp bridged into 3X100 W for the rear.
Speakers, 2X PSB Gold i front: PSB C6 i centre: PSM Image 2B rears.
NAD 5 disc CD player.
Pioneer DV 45A DVD/SACD/DVD Audio

Fabulous sound in 2 or multichannel, and iron clad reliable.

W

Fabulous sound</font>

 

[audioslave]

I have tried different brands like Sony, Pioneer, Denon, Yamaha and Rotel but I always end up going back to NAD. In the looks department, they may not win any beauty contest out there but on the sonic or musicality department, they are a hands down winner. About being pricey, well, the incremental difference is what we pay for to get a better sounding audio equipment. Their amps are traditionally over-rated in specs that?s why you always end up praising their products when comparing them side by side with other brands of the same specs. Presently, I am a happy owner of NAD C352 and C542 and I would like to enjoy them over time or until an itch to upgrade becomes unbearable.

 

[Billy Balou]

Well....As of Friday I'm a NAD 773 owner and will receive my shipment on Tuesday (7-6-04). This receiver will be used with 4 ohm Europa speakers in a 5.1 system and 2 Rocket UFW-10 subs.
My main concern was having a unit that listed being able to handle 4 ohms with extensive listening time. My current setup is powered up 6 - 10 hrs each day due to the schedules of my kids, wife and myself.
Dare I say.....my current music system is 30 yrs old (Technics SA3550 & BIC Venturi speakers with JVC turntable). This system still kicks butt and if it wasn't for the family wanting a H/T system I would stay with this system. It's not perfect but tough to beat with todays units for music under 2K IMHO.

I will gladly report how my receiver performs as I tend to agree that the quality is acceptable and within standards of the Denon, Yamaha and Marantz that I had auditioned. I almost purchased the Denon but was impressed with the sound of the NAD. I picked up the NAD 773 for $350 more than the Denon 3805 and I think it's worth it for the extra power to my speakers. Might not have all the bells & whistles but ohhh what a beautiful sound and the new models are shipping with a PLIIx upgrade.

I do appreciate all the forums and the wealth of knowledge that is exchanged on a regular basis that has assisted me in my purchase. Bottom Line..... Enjoy your system and have a beer!

 

[Audionutter]

Amongst all of the more affordable brands, I think NAD and Denon are good. NAD because they do not overrate and lie on their product spec sheet and Denon because they are truly innovative in bringing the high end to more normal prices. I started out my first stereo system about 20 years ago with a NAD pre-power combo, they still work to this day although I recently had to repair one channel on the pre-amp. Power amp never had any problems. I've also used all sorts of other stuff and amongst the manufacturers that I was not impressed with was Arcam. Also had a NAD HT receiver a few years ago but nowadays have moved on a bit to pre-pro and power amp setup.

I think Denon has a bright future, especially if they keep coming out with products like the 3805. An affordable HT receiver that uses a SHARC microprocessor from Analog Devices - how many mass market receivers within this price range have similar technology?

 

[TjMV3]

I have the NAD C542. I've had it for about 6 months, payed $400.00 * tax.

I'm very happy with it. I like the sound of this CD player in my systemn. It's been a major workhorse for me and no problems ...thus far. [knocks on wood]

I work from my home and it's not unusual for me to have the C542 playing music for about 6-8 hours a day.

This is my first NAD product, so all I can say, is that so far, my first experience with an NAD product has been nothing but positive.

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

I just bought my first "real" stereo system:

NAD C370 integrated
NAD C521 CD-player
PSB 1B speakers

and in the last few months I have had zero problems and notice a significant sonic upgrade from my Pioneer & Paradigm Ht system (used in 2-channel mode). But they are being used in differant rooms and that could be a significant differance.

Anyway. I am so far very happy with my NADs (huh huh huh huh nads....). But as I said, this is my first good system (not a table-top radio) and I've not been using it for a year yet... so they might develop problems later on.

PS: I get the nob-facor of brittish equipment! None of my friends have that (and it makes Judas Priest sound better )