Any NAD folks around here?

[smith101]

My used NADs work fine

I probably wouldn't pay the new price for NAD either, but if you have a precious and irreplaceable pair of speakers (no longer made) the "soft clipping" feature is uniquely valuable. In the event you really crank up the sound, you're less likely to damage the drivers. My speakers have sensitivity of only 87db/watt (low) so I appreciate the insurance, even though my twin 218thx amps put out 780 NAD watts each. Preamp is simple, sounds pure.

 

[Hawkeye]

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.
QUOTE]
BB, congrats on a truely great setup. Though I've never heard the NAD/Europa combo in person, I'm told it sounds spectacular. I am envious.

Please followup after you've had a few days with it.

 

[TjMV3]

I'm just testing. Trying to submit a new post. For some odd reason, all my attempts to start a new thread (new post) have not been showing up on the forum...for the last few days.
[Edit: You look to be okay as far as permissions go. - HawKe]

 

[TjMV3]

Odd, this post showed up...but not the new thread I tried to start.

Wonder if it's on my end? Is that possible?

 

[nadnklipsch]

Nad

I'm using a NAD 712 receiver, as a pre-amp/tuner, with my Carver M-1.0t amplifier. I love the NAD. It works great for what I use it for, and it can pick up stations with great reception even from my basement. The only thing that I don't like is that it doesn't have a phono imput, so I had to go and buy a phono pre-amp.

 

[zipper]

Also no posts

I've tried 2 new threads today & neither one showed up. Clint says they didn't touch it but don't know where it went.

 

[TjMV3]

I just tried a "New Thread" and it didn't show up.

Wonder if this post will?

Well, when replying to already existing posts.....there's no problem. Looks like the problem is in starting "New Threads".

 

[gverde]

I have owned a refurbished NAD T752 for about 4 months. I read alot of forums and found alot of people like the warm musicality of the receivers. I like the sound alot also. About 2 month after I purchased the unit I started to have the right front channel short out and my sub had no output. I took it in for repair under warranty and it ended up needing a new DSP chip. I was kind of disapointed at the quality control of NAD, but hopefully this won't happen again, at least for a long time. I am now using it as a pre/pro and powering it with a Marantz MM9000 amp. This combo has a nice overall sound.

 

[Unregistered]

I am pushing a pair of DM604's with an NAD C272 and I'm using the T752 as the reciever. I love it so far. One thing I will tell you is that th ecomponents are about 10x heavier than other similarly priced brands.

 

[LaserMark4]

Resurrect NAD Opinions for Separate Fans

I read this thread regarding NAD that was posted some time back, and wanted to get some updated opinions.

After a lot of searching and listening, I keep thinking NAD's separates are the best kept secret out there in terms of power, price, headroom, etc. I am looking at the T163/T973 combination (140x7 true sustained, up to 390w per channel IHF @ 4 oms). These things can rock, and seem to have some serious sustainable horsepower. I have seen prices in the $2,600 if shopped right. I'd like to use these with my ML's.

I listened to this combo with Magnapans and Martin Logans, and the dealer said, "Of course, it doesn't compete with the Anthem P5" so I said, let's compare. He drug down the beast, hooked it up, and after 15 minutes of listening, we both agreed that we could not tell a db of difference....and the NAD a price point about half of Anthem.

Did the same with Rotel with little more that minor appreciable differences, again, NAD is a WHOLE lot cheaper. Compared to McIntosh....definitely heard some quality jumps, but $8,000+, it out to be different. But again, the T163/T973 could not tell a quantum amount of difference over the McIntosh 200 140x7 receiver @ $6,600.

IMO, NAD has a horrible marketing and sales approach, so no ones knows the value, quality, nor much of the brand name.

Any others see it this way? Anyone had any bad experiences with these separates I listed above? Trying to make the right choice here.

 

[crashguy]

Old NAD stuff - A+, bullet proof
Newer NAD stuff......???? B-???

 

[Gelder]

I have the Nad C370 amp, C542 CD player, and a Nad tuner. I like the amp and CD player a lot. The tuner is okay.

 

[mustang_steve]

The way I see it, NAD just doesn't care about throwing buttloads of cash into advertising, just make good stuff and word of mouth will pass along customers.

Of crouse a few magazine ads don't hurt

Really though, I've tried a few of their stuff out...pretty nice, just out of my price range for a bit....plus my audio upgrade list has Magnepans on top at the moment

 

[LaserMark4]

It would be interesting to know what percent of market share they have with no marketing and minimal sales effort as they currently do-- I would think it is small. They did seem to have better following in some years back.

I'm curious, Crashguy.... are your opinions on the newer stuff derived from listening or reviewing? Friends with NAD equipment?

Here's the scoop on the set I am looking at from NAD's website: NAD T163/T973 Website

 

[Electone]

I have an NAD 3240PE Integrated Amp from 1988 that has performed flawlessly through its entire life. Amazing power from the rated 40wpc.

 

[warpdrive]

NAD stuff costs more, but I feel they are worth it. I had a NAD Prologic receiver which I sold and then got a new Yamaha 2400 receiver.

And you know what? My NAD sounds better than this Yamaha ever will.

I think for any given price, NAD will outshine a comparably priced Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo or whatever in terms of absolute sound quality. My old NAD receiver rated at 50W per channel easily has a punchier, more full sound than my Yamaha does.

I really wanted one of the newer NAD T763 receivers, but it was beyond my budger, but it really sounded REALLY REALLY good. Practically as good as the Adcom separates I also heard.

 

[Ron F.]

I was introduced to "better audio" through NAD. Equipment has included the 7250pe receiver, 5240 cd player, 6240 tape, 2600A amp. Today I am using a 7600 receiver with a C542 cd player. To me, the 7600 has proven to be an amazing piece of equipment. I count myself lucky to have one.

 

[crashguy]

I'm curious, Crashguy.... are your opinions on the newer stuff derived from listening or reviewing? Friends with NAD equipment?

...my own research.

When I was searching / reading everything I could find for my upcoming purchase of a new AVR, I read a number of consumer posted reviews on the NAD AVR's. There were about 50% of people who posted saying they had channels fail, and other problems I chalked up to serious QC issues. I WAS a fan of NAD stuff, and as you can see I own NAD equipment. I actually own 2 pieces of NAD gear, the amp in my sig, and an 3240 intergrated amp (40w X 2 rated, 240w X 2 capable), which I am also VERY pleased with. Given these facts, I seriously considered buying an NAD 753 (I think that was the model) at the time. But the QC issues scared me off. Also, the NAD stuff wasn't cheap either. I ended up going with a Denon 3802, which I was also pleased with, which I recently replaced with a Yamaha 2500.

Also, I was a fan of the design NAD used in their older stuff. Normal "rated" power, but huge reserves (4-6 dB of headroom), and ability to drive low impedence loads (2 ohms no prob). For example, my 2600A power amp is rated at 150w X2. It is capable of 1600w when bridged mono into a 4 ohm load. And it will run a 4 ohm load when bridged mono. Not many amps out there that advise running a 4 ohm load when bridged mono (effectively 2 ohms). They kind of went away from that design filosophy (sp?) which is what turned me off of them. The older stuff I own (80's and 90's) I love, and I believe is some of the best value for your AV dollar out there when purchased from internet auction sites such as ebay.

That's my reason for saying what I said.

 

[warpdrive]

He drug down the beast, hooked it up, and after 15 minutes of listening, .

There's your problem there, drugged amplifiers are definitely halucinatory experiences.

Seriously, if you liked the sound of the NAD combo, and it held its own against the Anthem. Then you definitely have a valid candidate. NAD has always been a value leader when it comes to sound quality, and where NAD shines best is in their amps, and preamps....the whole reason they developed their respect in the audio community. All the sound, conservative specs, and none of the frills.

 

[LaserMark4]

Crashguy-- You certainly have much more experience and background in this that I do. I can see some of your points, and they certainly seem valid. Those old ones seem to have some serious horsepower.

I think on receiver side, NAD is probably under the same gun that the masses of manufacturers are under-- lower prices, lower quality, falsified ratings and performance specs, manufacturing in remote jungles of the world, etc.....and a juggling act of all those factors to stay in business. Not something I would want to be in--

As an FYI, here is some of the scoop on the way NAD is trying to stay in the game with their separates. You might find this interesting: NAD Amps Information

Here's some of the specs on the T973 I am looking at:

• One kilowat (1,000 wats) continuous power output at 8 ohms

(would that mean maybe a 1,600w or so at 4 ohms?)

• 7 x 140W Minimum Continuous Power (8 / 4 Ohms); all channels driven simultaneously

• 230W, 390W and 450W IHF Power into 8, 4 and 2 ohms, respectively

I have month or two before the HT/Sound room construction is finished, and then the buying spree begins. So I will still keep looking and getting educated. Thanks for the good info--