Why doesn't NAD get mentioned here more often?

[Tech HiFi]

Well have no fear, Because its actually pronounced N-A-D Which is short for New Acoustic Dimension

I always thought it was No Audible Difference. But, really... It's great stuff, sounds fantastic, but short on the bells and whistles.

 

[wire]

Like was said earlier, lovely audio side on the AV receivers, but the video processing leaves something to be desired. It appears this may have been deliberate on NAD's side. A good DVD player can bypass the AVR and HDMI link directly into your HDTV, and therefore you are not wasting money buying duplicate processing capability on the AV receiver.

I've owned NAD in the past, but it seems they are now having some QAQC reliability problems on some units, and they need to get their act together on the customer service side. I don't know what's happening, but I heard a lot of their sales & marketing staff has moved on.

I have yet to hear their new line, (T775)

Given your from the Prairies and listin to Rush and know NAD , I would guess your from Saskatchwan and maybe around Regina . Just a guess , when i was younger there was alot of NAD rolling around in Regina , I even owned a 3155 , 2155 ( i think ) bridged . NAD is good power , if you need the power , the NADS will produce .
There has never been alot of proganda with the NAD , its never really been mass marketed equipment and there Amp sections are well above the Mass produced Amp sections .

 

[3db]

My sediments exactly

Given your from the Prairies and listin to Rush and know NAD , I would guess your from Saskatchwan and maybe around Regina . Just a guess , when i was younger there was alot of NAD rolling around in Regina , I even owned a 3155 , 2155 ( i think ) bridged . NAD is good power , if you need the power , the NADS will produce .
There has never been alot of proganda with the NAD , its never really been mass marketed equipment and there Amp sections are well above the Mass produced Amp sections .

I guess its a trade-off then between features and power. I remember hearing a NAD integrated amp, turntable (Back you savages!! cause thats all there was at that time) playing thru Energy22 speakers at a friends house. The song playing was B52's "Planet Claire" which for a lack of better descitption, has a very low throbbing bass rythm. Man that sounded soo good even at high volume levels.

There is no doubt in my mind that when it comes to delivering clean power, NAD does it in spades. So it comes back to features vs power and what is more important to the buyer.

 

[Gimpy Ric]

Back in my Army days (mid '80's) all my audio buddies were buying Yammy, I was buying NAD & Denon electronics. I still have an NAD 1122 pre amp, and a NAD 2200 power amp.

Today people on this board get scared when they hear about a 4 ohm load. NAD says "Tough $hit". That 2200 makes 100 x 2 into 8 ohms, forgot the 4 ohm spec, BUT at it CRANKS OUT 600 WATTS PER CHANNEL INTO 2 OHMs! And not for a mere 20 ms, but 200 ms! And thats with the soft clip over drive engaged. 600 x 2 @ 2. Thats Bad A$$.

And I only paid around $350.00 for that amp.

 

[MrTaxMan]

I just bought the new NAD 775 receiver last week. My dealer didn't have them in stock, so we're waiting for it to arrive from NAD warehouse in Massachusetts within the next week. I was originally looking at the Onkyo 705 but decided since I had the money to go ahead and move up a couple of notches on the quality scale. NAD was always one of those, "If I ever get the money, I want one of those" kind of deals.
Feature-wise, it matches very well with the Onkyos, Denons, and Yamahas out there.
Just got my new RBH 5.1 speakers few days ago, but have nothing to plug them into because I don't currently have any system. So I'll have nothing to compare the NAD to when I finally get it all hooked up.

 

[wire]

I just bought the new NAD 775 receiver last week. My dealer didn't have them in stock, so we're waiting for it to arrive from NAD warehouse in Massachusetts within the next week. I was originally looking at the Onkyo 705 but decided since I had the money to go ahead and move up a couple of notches on the quality scale. NAD was always one of those, "If I ever get the money, I want one of those" kind of deals.
Feature-wise, it matches very well with the Onkyos, Denons, and Yamahas out there.
Just got my new RBH 5.1 speakers few days ago, but have nothing to plug them into because I don't currently have any system. So I'll have nothing to compare the NAD to when I finally get it all hooked up.

Don't you worry about comparing , NAD's come with a very Beefy Amp section , you wont have to compare to the Mass produced Brands .

 

[wire]

Back in my Army days (mid '80's) all my audio buddies were buying Yammy, I was buying NAD & Denon electronics. I still have an NAD 1122 pre amp, and a NAD 2200 power amp.

Today people on this board get scared when they hear about a 4 ohm load. NAD says "Tough $hit". That 2200 makes 100 x 2 into 8 ohms, forgot the 4 ohm spec, BUT at it CRANKS OUT 600 WATTS PER CHANNEL INTO 2 OHMs! And not for a mere 20 ms, but 200 ms! And thats with the soft clip over drive engaged. 600 x 2 @ 2. Thats Bad A$$.

And I only paid around $350.00 for that amp.

Now thats what im talking about .
Thats an Amp . Ppl on this board still get scared of 4 ohm load , because Amp sections has not changed , most ppl. think they have , but they havent , these recievers have not changed either in the Amp sections .

 

[Bluesmoke]

I have a question: How are the NAD 2400 amplifiers? I see these on ebay on a regular basis. Their power levels don't seem to be very powerful, but they do have THX logo, so I guess they can't be all that weak.

 

[mouettus]

I have a question: How are the NAD 2400 amplifiers? I see these on ebay on a regular basis. Their power levels don't seem to be very powerful, but they do have THX logo, so I guess they can't be all that weak.

Ditto on that one. I've been wondering the same thing for a long time now.

 

[gus6464]

Isn't Rotel just as expensive as NAD?

 

[ZoFo]

Their new AVR & PP looks sweet!

Was reading about their new products, did not know they were modular! I have always wonder why more companies don't embrace the modular design and the great upgrade capabilities they offer; here is what they say about it:

Modular Construction
The NAD T 785, T 775, T 765 AV receivers and T 175 pre-pro share an entirely new electro-mechanical configuration. This places important circuitry on five fully independent, modular circuit cards, including separate cards for digital audio and HDMI, component video, analog video, and 2-channel, and multichannel analog audio. The obvious advantages of this scheme include serviceability and expandability, and easy and cost-effective introduction of new technologies. For example, if and when the Dolby True HD and/or DTS Master lossless multichannel formats become fully useful standards of high-definition discs or other recordings, NAD will make upgraded processing available. With modular construction, and since the three models already have the HDMI v1.3 in place, this can be made practicable and affordable.



They have Audyssey Auto Calibration and MultEQ XT which is very nice, and this explains their HDMI capability:

Advanced HDMI and Digital Video
With HDMI digital video/audio interconnection fast gaining acceptance, implementation becomes a key feature for all next-gen AV gear. Yet here as always NAD has elected to follow the Hippocratic principle of “First, do no harm.” Consequently, while all four new NADs include a trio of HDMI v1.3 inputs and switching, they eschew the chip-based video-DSP “upscaling” that looks so attractive in competitors’ brochures, but that so frequently results in video indistinguishable from, or in fact actually inferior to the original source. Instead, the T785, T775, and T175 pre-pro perform superbly high-quality HDMI “cross-conversion,” delivering all analog-video inputs (composite, S-, or component video) to HDMI with full quality, permitting a single-cable link to the video display. The T 765 provides straightforward HDMI switching (video-only), but all four designs perform video transcoding, so that signals from any analog-video input (composite, S-, or component) are always present at any of these analog outputs.

The new designs maintain NAD’s core values beginning with its “Music First” design philosophy
All four models route incoming HDMI signals in their original resolution, up to and including 1080p, and of course accept digital-audio via HDMI, simplifying hookup. NAD urges system-designers and end-users to look beyond the hype and observe that the vast majority of systems can derive no meaningful benefit from 1080p signals (a very large screen/close seating-distance are required even to be perceived), and can easily exceed the capabilities of cables or associated equipment. And since the great majority of popular flat-panel and rear-projection hi-def displays incorporate their own, non-bypassable scalers, any upstream scaler, whether a dedicated component or within an AV receiver, is rendered largely purposeless.


I have no idea what these cost, all I know is it's going to be to much for my bedroom setup so I am looking hard at Emovita's line right now. I have Outlaw 990/7700 for my main setup and I have been very happy with that; but if I had the money to burn I would love to own a NAD or Parasound Halo setup.

 

[annunaki]

Someone asked before about B&W

The B&W Group consists of:

B&W Speakers, Classe' Audio, I-Command, and Rotel. They are distributed in the United States by Equity International based out of Reading, MA.

PSB and NAD are part of Lenbrook as mentioned previously.

 

[highfihoney]

All this talk of large sweaty nads has me running for the peto bismal,puke.

 

[Rogozhin]

My first integrated amp was a nad 314 and I enjoyed the sound, so I picked up a few of their dedicated amps over the years (a 2155 is being sent my way as I type this-for $130).

I compared my nad 902 ($80), and 2100 ($120) bridged mono to run the left and right mains) to both an Adcom GFA-555mk2 and my 92 Elite amp section and these inexpensive amps provide a much more dynamic sound-stage than either of my other options.

Specs:

2155-

Continuous output power into 8½ * 55W (17.4dBW)
Rated distortion (THD 20Hz - 20kHz) 0.03%
Clipping power (maximum continuous power per channel) 65W
IHF Dynamic headroom at 8½ +3dB
IHF dynamic power (maximum short term power per channel) 8½ 100W
4½ 100W
2½ 130W
Damping factor (ref. 8½, 50Hz) >50
Input impedance 22k½
Input sensitivity (for rated power into 8½) 1.3V
THD (20Hz - 20kHz) <0.03%
Bridged Mode
Continuous output power into 8½ * 125W (21dBW)
IHF Dynamic headroom at 8½ +2.5dB
IHF dynamic power (maximum short term power per channel) 8½ 250W


902-

Continuous output power into 8½ * 30W (14.8dBW)
Rated distortion (THD 20Hz - 20kHz) 0.03%
Clipping power (maximum continuous power per channel) 38W
IHF Dynamic headroom at 8½ +2dB
IHF dynamic power (maximum short term power per channel) 8½ 48W (16.8dBW)
4½ 65W (18dBW)
2½ 85W (19.3dBW)
Input impedance 10k½ / 470pF
Input sensitivity (for rated power into 8½) 1V
Frequency response (2Hz - 100kHz) ±0.3dB
Signal/noise ratio ref. rated power 110dB
THD (20Hz - 20kHz) <0.05%
Bridged Mode
Continuous output power into 8½ * 90W 19.5dBW)
IHF Dynamic headroom at 8½ +2dB
IHF dynamic power (maximum short term power per channel) 8½ 140W (21.5dBW)
4½ 170W (22.3dBW)


2100-

Continuous output power into 8½ * 60W (17dBW)
Rated distortion (THD 20Hz - 20kHz) 0.03%
Clipping power (maximum continuous power per channel) 70W
IHF Dynamic headroom at 8½ +6dB
IHF dynamic power (maximum short term power per channel) 8½ 200W (23dBW)
4½ 250W (24dBW)
2½ 330W (25dBW)
Damping factor (ref. 8½, 50Hz) >100
Input impedance 10k½ / 600pF
Input sensitivity (for rated power into 8½) 0.85V
Frequency response 3Hz - 100kHz / +0, -3dBdB
Signal/noise ratio ref. 1W 100dB
ref. rated power 117dB
THD (20Hz - 20kHz) <0.03%
Bridged Mode
Continuous output power into 8½ * 100W (20dBW)
IHF Dynamic headroom at 8½ +7dB
IHF dynamic power (maximum short term power per channel) 8½ 500W (27dBW)
4½ 660W (28dBW)

Elite 92txh-

Continuous Power Output (20 Hz to 20 kHz, 8 Ω, 0.09 %)
Front. . . . .130 W + 130 W (92TXH), 140 W + 140 W (94TXH)
Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 W (92TXH), 140 W (94TXH)
Surround . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 W + 130 W (92TXH)
140 W + 140 W (94TXH)
Surround back . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 W + 130 W (92TXH)
140 W + 140 W (94TXH)
Continuous Power Output (1 kHz, 6 Ω, 1.0 %)
Front. . . . .160 W + 160 W (92TXH), 180 W + 180 W (94TXH)
Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 W (92TXH), 180 W (94TXH)
Surround . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 W + 160 W (92TXH)
180 W + 180 W (94TXH)
Surround back . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 W + 160 W (92TXH)
180 W + 180 W (94TXH)
Total harmonic distortion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.05 %
(20 Hz to 20 kHz, 120 W, 8 Ω) (92TXH)
(20 Hz to 20 kHz, 130 W, 8 Ω) (94TXH)


The Adcom PDF won't copy to the board.

Here is a picture of my sweaty nads:

 

[jamie2112]

To answer the OPs original question: Because they are ugly????? Just kidding....LOL Adcom has a very healthy bloodline and although their products are not the Sleekest or pretty by any means they provide well constructed and well respected audio products.....

 

[3db]

To answer the OPs original question: Because they are ugly????? Just kidding....LOL Adcom has a very healthy bloodline and although their products are not the Sleekest or pretty by any means they provide well constructed and well respected audio products.....

Your ugly is my understated elegance!!

 

[3db]

Someone asked before about B&W

The B&W Group consists of:

B&W Speakers, Classe' Audio, I-Command, and Rotel. They are distributed in the United States by Equity International based out of Reading, MA.

PSB and NAD are part of Lenbrook as mentioned previously.

Classe, Another Canadian maufacturer..

 

[Haoleb]

To answer the OPs original question: Because they are ugly????? Just kidding....LOL Adcom has a very healthy bloodline and although their products are not the Sleekest or pretty by any means they provide well constructed and well respected audio products.....

Ok, so what again does that have to do with the OP's question about NAD amps?

 

[emorphien]

Your ugly is my understated elegance!!

Amen! I like my NADs

 

[jamie2112]

Ok, so what again does that have to do with the OP's question about NAD amps?

I totally fumbled on that I meant NAD not Adcom...I am sorry...to late for me to edit it...I don't know what I was thinking when I posted Adcom considering I read the darn post.. Sorry bout the fumble....