Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?

Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?

I would appreciate your experience!

My Revox B251 "gave up" and I would like to buy NAD pre- and power-
amplifier.

My requirements:
- Musical sound picture and details (i have also a 3020i and this
amplifier sounds really nice)
- can drive critical speakers (I have Dynaudio 3-ways system); I am
also thinking one day to buy Dynaudio Confidence 5
- good MC part for my Ortofon TMC 200 (low output MC)
- shall additionally to CD have also AUX input

How good are following NAD-s:
1155
1300
208 THX
218 THX
Are there better ones?

Remark: I am going to buy 2nd hand.

Thank you!
Drazen

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?

Drazen wrote:
> I would appreciate your experience!
>
> My Revox B251 "gave up" and I would like to buy NAD pre- and power-
> amplifier.
>
> My requirements:
> - Musical sound picture and details (i have also a 3020i and this
> amplifier sounds really nice)
> - can drive critical speakers (I have Dynaudio 3-ways system); I am
> also thinking one day to buy Dynaudio Confidence 5
> - good MC part for my Ortofon TMC 200 (low output MC)
> - shall additionally to CD have also AUX input
>
> How good are following NAD-s:
> 1155
> 1300
> 208 THX
> 218 THX
> Are there better ones?
>
> Remark: I am going to buy 2nd hand.
>
> Thank you!
> Drazen

Drazen,

I'd add the NAD 220PE amp to the list. Solidly built, really reliable,
though I have had to replace the speaker relays in them. I've never
compared them to the newer 208 or 218 for sound. I'd also consider the
1600 preamp/tuner if you want a radio.

Regards,
Tim

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?


"Drazen" <dadonja007@yahoo.de> wrote in message
news:23b8c957-e962-4371-b65a-358e9eb3c874@u10g2000prn.googlegroups,com ...
>I would appreciate your experience!
>
> My Revox B251 "gave up" and I would like to buy NAD pre- and power-
> amplifier.
>
> My requirements:
> - Musical sound picture and details (i have also a 3020i and this
> amplifier sounds really nice)
> - can drive critical speakers (I have Dynaudio 3-ways system); I am
> also thinking one day to buy Dynaudio Confidence 5
> - good MC part for my Ortofon TMC 200 (low output MC)
> - shall additionally to CD have also AUX input
>
> How good are following NAD-s:
> 1155
> 1300
> 208 THX
> 218 THX
> Are there better ones?
>
> Remark: I am going to buy 2nd hand.

**Good. First off - Don't restrict yourself to one brand. Whilst NAD have
built some good amps over the years, they've also built some shockers.
Anything with the PE moniker, for instance. IMO, is a poor choice. Another
excellent amplifier brand is Rotel. Well worth considering and, depending on
your market, may be better value for money. There are other choices too.

Trevor Wilson

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?

In article <64anfcF2b87ifU1@mid.individual,net >, "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio,com .au> wrote:
>
>"Drazen" <dadonja007@yahoo.de> wrote in message
>news:23b8c957-e962-4371-b65a-358e9eb3c874@u10g2000prn.googlegroups,com ...
>>I would appreciate your experience!
>>
>> My Revox B251 "gave up" and I would like to buy NAD pre- and power-
>> amplifier.
>>
>> My requirements:
>> - Musical sound picture and details (i have also a 3020i and this
>> amplifier sounds really nice)
>> - can drive critical speakers (I have Dynaudio 3-ways system); I am
>> also thinking one day to buy Dynaudio Confidence 5
>> - good MC part for my Ortofon TMC 200 (low output MC)
>> - shall additionally to CD have also AUX input
>>
>> How good are following NAD-s:
>> 1155
>> 1300
>> 208 THX
>> 218 THX
>> Are there better ones?
>>
>> Remark: I am going to buy 2nd hand.
>
>**Good. First off - Don't restrict yourself to one brand. Whilst NAD have
>built some good amps over the years, they've also built some shockers.
>Anything with the PE moniker, for instance. IMO, is a poor choice. Another
>excellent amplifier brand is Rotel. Well worth considering and, depending on
>your market, may be better value for money. There are other choices too.
>

I bought way too many junked NAD products that I have to fix, some I paid good
money for. Like that 400 WPC stereo receiver, and that top priced preamp.
Build quality is nothing more than typical. I was fixing a tuner/preamp and
the obsolete tuner part made it difficult. Does NAD carry old parts ?
I never tried contacting them.

greg

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?


"GregS" <zekfrivo@zekfrivolous,com > wrote in message
news:fruapo$mj5$3@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu...
> In article <64anfcF2b87ifU1@mid.individual,net >, "Trevor Wilson"
> <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio,com .au> wrote:
>>
>>"Drazen" <dadonja007@yahoo.de> wrote in message
>>news:23b8c957-e962-4371-b65a-358e9eb3c874@u10g2000prn.googlegroups,com ...
>>>I would appreciate your experience!
>>>
>>> My Revox B251 "gave up" and I would like to buy NAD pre- and power-
>>> amplifier.
>>>
>>> My requirements:
>>> - Musical sound picture and details (i have also a 3020i and this
>>> amplifier sounds really nice)
>>> - can drive critical speakers (I have Dynaudio 3-ways system); I am
>>> also thinking one day to buy Dynaudio Confidence 5
>>> - good MC part for my Ortofon TMC 200 (low output MC)
>>> - shall additionally to CD have also AUX input
>>>
>>> How good are following NAD-s:
>>> 1155
>>> 1300
>>> 208 THX
>>> 218 THX
>>> Are there better ones?
>>>
>>> Remark: I am going to buy 2nd hand.
>>
>>**Good. First off - Don't restrict yourself to one brand. Whilst NAD have
>>built some good amps over the years, they've also built some shockers.
>>Anything with the PE moniker, for instance. IMO, is a poor choice. Another
>>excellent amplifier brand is Rotel. Well worth considering and, depending
>>on
>>your market, may be better value for money. There are other choices too.
>>
>
> I bought way too many junked NAD products that I have to fix, some I paid
> good
> money for. Like that 400 WPC stereo receiver, and that top priced preamp.
> Build quality is nothing more than typical. I was fixing a tuner/preamp
> and
> the obsolete tuner part made it difficult. Does NAD carry old parts ?
> I never tried contacting them.
>
> greg
>

Used to be they carried parts for older units until they just sold out.
Don't know if that info still applies. NAD has "dual citizenship" inasmuch
as they are equally based in Canada and the US. This might mean they don't
pay typical US property taxes on unsold parts.

I was informed that Yamaha recently just threw away a bunch of old parts
rather than pay property taxes on them!


Mark Z.

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?

In article <64anfcF2b87ifU1@mid.individual,net >,
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio,com .au> wrote:

> "Drazen" <dadonja007@yahoo.de> wrote in message
> news:23b8c957-e962-4371-b65a-358e9eb3c874@u10g2000prn.googlegroups,com ...
> >I would appreciate your experience!
> >
> > My Revox B251 "gave up" and I would like to buy NAD pre- and power-
> > amplifier.
> >
> > My requirements:
> > - Musical sound picture and details (i have also a 3020i and this
> > amplifier sounds really nice)
> > - can drive critical speakers (I have Dynaudio 3-ways system); I am
> > also thinking one day to buy Dynaudio Confidence 5
> > - good MC part for my Ortofon TMC 200 (low output MC)
> > - shall additionally to CD have also AUX input
> >
> > How good are following NAD-s:
> > 1155
> > 1300
> > 208 THX
> > 218 THX
> > Are there better ones?
> >
> > Remark: I am going to buy 2nd hand.
>
> **Good. First off - Don't restrict yourself to one brand. Whilst NAD have
> built some good amps over the years, they've also built some shockers.
> Anything with the PE moniker, for instance. IMO, is a poor choice. Another
> excellent amplifier brand is Rotel. Well worth considering and, depending on
> your market, may be better value for money. There are other choices too.
>
> Trevor Wilson

Whats wrong with the PE monikered NAD amps?

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?

Finally, I have bought a combination NAD 1600 + NAD 208 THX.

How good is the NAD 1600?
As good as best pre-amplifiers like 1300?

How good is the MC input at 1600?


Drazen

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?


"Herbert Viola" <wgates@microsoft,com > wrote in message
news:wgates-0A8C72.19041805042008@news.verizon,net ...
>
> Whats wrong with the PE monikered NAD amps?

The Power Envelope circuit.

MrT.

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?


"Herbert Viola" <wgates@microsoft,com > wrote in message
news:wgates-0A8C72.19041805042008@news.verizon,net ...
> In article <64anfcF2b87ifU1@mid.individual,net >,
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio,com .au> wrote:
>
>> "Drazen" <dadonja007@yahoo.de> wrote in message
>> news:23b8c957-e962-4371-b65a-358e9eb3c874@u10g2000prn.googlegroups,com ...
>> >I would appreciate your experience!
>> >
>> > My Revox B251 "gave up" and I would like to buy NAD pre- and power-
>> > amplifier.
>> >
>> > My requirements:
>> > - Musical sound picture and details (i have also a 3020i and this
>> > amplifier sounds really nice)
>> > - can drive critical speakers (I have Dynaudio 3-ways system); I am
>> > also thinking one day to buy Dynaudio Confidence 5
>> > - good MC part for my Ortofon TMC 200 (low output MC)
>> > - shall additionally to CD have also AUX input
>> >
>> > How good are following NAD-s:
>> > 1155
>> > 1300
>> > 208 THX
>> > 218 THX
>> > Are there better ones?
>> >
>> > Remark: I am going to buy 2nd hand.
>>
>> **Good. First off - Don't restrict yourself to one brand. Whilst NAD have
>> built some good amps over the years, they've also built some shockers.
>> Anything with the PE moniker, for instance. IMO, is a poor choice.
>> Another
>> excellent amplifier brand is Rotel. Well worth considering and, depending
>> on
>> your market, may be better value for money. There are other choices too.
>>
>> Trevor Wilson
>
> Whats wrong with the PE monikered NAD amps?

**Where to start?
Let's start with:

* Sound quality - worse than competing products.
* Reliability - worse than competing products.
* The potential for serious damage to loudspeakers is ever-present.

That'll do. The PE stuff was a disaster.

Trevor Wilson

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?


"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio,com .au> wrote in message
news:667btaF2hd67qU1@mid.individual,net ...
>
> "Herbert Viola" <wgates@microsoft,com > wrote in message
> news:wgates-0A8C72.19041805042008@news.verizon,net ...
>> In article <64anfcF2b87ifU1@mid.individual,net >,
>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio,com .au> wrote:
>>
>>> "Drazen" <dadonja007@yahoo.de> wrote in message
>>> news:23b8c957-e962-4371-b65a-358e9eb3c874@u10g2000prn.googlegroups,com ...
>>> >I would appreciate your experience!
>>> >
>>> > My Revox B251 "gave up" and I would like to buy NAD pre- and power-
>>> > amplifier.
>>> >
>>> > My requirements:
>>> > - Musical sound picture and details (i have also a 3020i and this
>>> > amplifier sounds really nice)
>>> > - can drive critical speakers (I have Dynaudio 3-ways system); I am
>>> > also thinking one day to buy Dynaudio Confidence 5
>>> > - good MC part for my Ortofon TMC 200 (low output MC)
>>> > - shall additionally to CD have also AUX input
>>> >
>>> > How good are following NAD-s:
>>> > 1155
>>> > 1300
>>> > 208 THX
>>> > 218 THX
>>> > Are there better ones?
>>> >
>>> > Remark: I am going to buy 2nd hand.
>>>
>>> **Good. First off - Don't restrict yourself to one brand. Whilst NAD
>>> have
>>> built some good amps over the years, they've also built some shockers.
>>> Anything with the PE moniker, for instance. IMO, is a poor choice.
>>> Another
>>> excellent amplifier brand is Rotel. Well worth considering and,
>>> depending on
>>> your market, may be better value for money. There are other choices too.
>>>
>>> Trevor Wilson
>>
>> Whats wrong with the PE monikered NAD amps?
>
> **Where to start?
> Let's start with:
>
> * Sound quality - worse than competing products.
> * Reliability - worse than competing products.
> * The potential for serious damage to loudspeakers is ever-present.
>
> That'll do. The PE stuff was a disaster.
>
> Trevor Wilson
>
>

Not a NAD expert, really - but in my experience with NAD there is no more
potential for damage to speakers than with any other amp with a competently
designed protection circuit.

NAD was always a bit spotty on reliability, not limited to their PE models.
Long term heat damage to caps, resistors, etc for one thing; and the
Taiwanese origin of many of their products wasn't so great either, from
cheap electrolytic capacitors to somewhat shoddy physical manufacture. I've
seen one or two British-built NAD amps which did seem MUCH nicer though.

I would say sound quality of the PE series was probably at least average -
though I've never had one at home, and so my impressions having only worked
on them in the shop could be erroneous in this area...

Mark Z.

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?


"Mark D. Zacharias" <mzacharias@nonsense,net > wrote in message
news:qsILj.7889$2g1.4222@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc,com ...
> Not a NAD expert, really - but in my experience with NAD there is no more
> potential for damage to speakers than with any other amp with a
competently
> designed protection circuit.

Well that rules out a few NAD amps then.

> I would say sound quality of the PE series was probably at least average -

Yep, just average.

MrT.

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?


"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
news:48003422$0$3660$afc38c87@news.optusnet,com .au...
>
> "Mark D. Zacharias" <mzacharias@nonsense,net > wrote in message
> news:qsILj.7889$2g1.4222@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc,com ...
>> Not a NAD expert, really - but in my experience with NAD there is no more
>> potential for damage to speakers than with any other amp with a
> competently
>> designed protection circuit.
>
> Well that rules out a few NAD amps then.
>
>> I would say sound quality of the PE series was probably at least
>> average -
>
> Yep, just average.
>
> MrT.
>
>

Well, by "average" I mean that it would be rare indeed for anyone to hear
the difference between an NAD amp of the PE series and any other competently
designed amp, functioning properly and operating within it's limits, in a
double-blind test.

Mark Z.

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?


"Mark D. Zacharias" <mzacharias@nonsense,net > wrote in message
news:ca1Mj.1198$7Z2.1114@newssvr12.news.prodigy,net ...
>
> Well, by "average" I mean that it would be rare indeed for anyone to hear
> the difference between an NAD amp of the PE series and any other
competently
> designed amp, functioning properly and operating within it's limits, in a
> double-blind test.

Until the PE circuits kick in, or the amp blows up. Whichever happens first.
But the "competently designed" rules out the NAD anyway :-)

MrT.

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?


"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote in message
news:4800a0c8$0$12542$afc38c87@news.optusnet,com .au...
>
> "Mark D. Zacharias" <mzacharias@nonsense,net > wrote in message
> news:ca1Mj.1198$7Z2.1114@newssvr12.news.prodigy,net ...
>>
>> Well, by "average" I mean that it would be rare indeed for anyone to hear
>> the difference between an NAD amp of the PE series and any other
> competently
>> designed amp, functioning properly and operating within it's limits, in a
>> double-blind test.
>
> Until the PE circuits kick in, or the amp blows up. Whichever happens
> first.
> But the "competently designed" rules out the NAD anyway :-)
>
> MrT.
>
>


I always try to include a sufficient "fudge factor".

Mark Z.

Re: Which NAD pre- and power-amplifier are the best?


"Mark D. Zacharias" <mzacharias@nonsense,net > wrote in message
news:qsILj.7889$2g1.4222@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc,com ...
>
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio,com .au> wrote in message
> news:667btaF2hd67qU1@mid.individual,net ...
>>
>> "Herbert Viola" <wgates@microsoft,com > wrote in message
>> news:wgates-0A8C72.19041805042008@news.verizon,net ...
>>> In article <64anfcF2b87ifU1@mid.individual,net >,
>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio,com .au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Drazen" <dadonja007@yahoo.de> wrote in message
>>>> news:23b8c957-e962-4371-b65a-358e9eb3c874@u10g2000prn.googlegroups,com ...
>>>> >I would appreciate your experience!
>>>> >
>>>> > My Revox B251 "gave up" and I would like to buy NAD pre- and power-
>>>> > amplifier.
>>>> >
>>>> > My requirements:
>>>> > - Musical sound picture and details (i have also a 3020i and this
>>>> > amplifier sounds really nice)
>>>> > - can drive critical speakers (I have Dynaudio 3-ways system); I am
>>>> > also thinking one day to buy Dynaudio Confidence 5
>>>> > - good MC part for my Ortofon TMC 200 (low output MC)
>>>> > - shall additionally to CD have also AUX input
>>>> >
>>>> > How good are following NAD-s:
>>>> > 1155
>>>> > 1300
>>>> > 208 THX
>>>> > 218 THX
>>>> > Are there better ones?
>>>> >
>>>> > Remark: I am going to buy 2nd hand.
>>>>
>>>> **Good. First off - Don't restrict yourself to one brand. Whilst NAD
>>>> have
>>>> built some good amps over the years, they've also built some shockers.
>>>> Anything with the PE moniker, for instance. IMO, is a poor choice.
>>>> Another
>>>> excellent amplifier brand is Rotel. Well worth considering and,
>>>> depending on
>>>> your market, may be better value for money. There are other choices
>>>> too.
>>>>
>>>> Trevor Wilson
>>>
>>> Whats wrong with the PE monikered NAD amps?
>>
>> **Where to start?
>> Let's start with:
>>
>> * Sound quality - worse than competing products.
>> * Reliability - worse than competing products.
>> * The potential for serious damage to loudspeakers is ever-present.
>>
>> That'll do. The PE stuff was a disaster.
>>
>> Trevor Wilson
>>
>>
>
> Not a NAD expert, really - but in my experience with NAD there is no more
> potential for damage to speakers than with any other amp with a
> competently designed protection circuit.

**Incorrect. The disaster potential built into PE equipped NAD amps first
came to my notice when I was selling them. I sold a pair of KEF 104.2
speakers and a NAD 2200 amp to a client. He blew the tweeters in short
order. I was surprised, since the NADs used ferro-fluid cooled tweeters and,
IME, were indestructible (up 'till that point). I had sold quite a few pairs
of the things. Fortunately, the local distributor of the KEFs was also the
NAD distributor and I managed to squeak them though under warranty for my
client. Intrigued, I put the 2200 on my test bench to see what was going on.
After 30 mins of testing, it became abundantly clear what the problem was.
It goes like this:

As you are no doubt aware, most people who listen loud, turn the volume up,
'till the amp is just nudging clipping (slight harshness on loud notes).
Naturally, those with alcohol impaired hearing will tend to crank the volume
up even further, but let's forget that, for the moment. Anyway, it would be
safe to assume that less than 5% of the programme material is in the
clipping region and thus the harmonic structure is pretty much what it
should be. Not so, the the NAD PE stuff. When the high Voltage power supply
is exhausted (which occurs after a period of time in all PE amps), the
clipping can be horrendous, amounting to easily 50% of programme material.
The skewed harmonic structure can easily destroy tweeters (and mids).

>
> NAD was always a bit spotty on reliability, not limited to their PE
> models. Long term heat damage to caps, resistors, etc for one thing; and
> the Taiwanese origin of many of their products wasn't so great either,
> from cheap electrolytic capacitors to somewhat shoddy physical
> manufacture. I've seen one or two British-built NAD amps which did seem
> MUCH nicer though.

**I've seen a Danish built NAD which was superbly built. That is not the
point. The vast majoriy of Asian sourced NAD stuff, with the PE moniker, had
the extra unreliability associated with the PE circuits. That, combined with
NAD's typical poor reliability, anyway, has led to other brands taking over
their market spot.

>
> I would say sound quality of the PE series was probably at least average -
> though I've never had one at home, and so my impressions having only
> worked on them in the shop could be erroneous in this area...

**Sound quality was average. VERY average. The sudden application of a
massive extra supply rail is not conducive to proper operation of an output
stage. I hasten to add that several other manufacturers have used the same
(or similar schemes) over the years.

Trevor Wilson