NAD 20 Series 3020 models

Audiolab 9000Q and 9000P
reubensm said:
The 7020 is essentially the receiver version of the 3020 (a hybrid of the 3020 amp and 4020A tuner). It is quite complicated inside because a lot has been crammed into a small inside (this includes the manual dial mechanism). However I personally believe that it should be easy to fix, with some patience and a lot of spare time at hand. Incidentally I've been looking all over for the 4020 tuner to pair with my 3020 but can't seem to find one anywhere in India. So, at some point in time, if you're not able to get if fixed and do not want to keep it, or want to get rid of it anyways, I'd be happy to buy it from you.

Here is a picture of the inside:
w8dj.jpg
Click to expand...

Rueben,
I will keep it in mind. I have now given it to a chap for servicing. What I liked about 7020 is the quality of it's build . Especially the smooth tuning dial and not to mention the quality. I also had a matching cassette deck which I sold but regret now as the tone was superior to many decks I had. I also had the matching NAD Turntable at one time but decided against keeping all these. I believe others without TT should benefit from enjoying music from these wonderful wonders. They sound far superior to the junk that's coming out these days.
 
kuruvilajacob said:
Rueben,
I will keep it in mind. I have now given it to a chap for servicing. What I liked about 7020 is the quality of it's build . Especially the smooth tuning dial and not to mention the quality. I also had a matching cassette deck which I sold but regret now as the tone was superior to many decks I had. I also had the matching NAD Turntable at one time but decided against keeping all these. I believe others without TT should benefit from enjoying music from these wonderful wonders. They sound far superior to the junk that's coming out these days.
Click to expand...

Thanks Mr. Kuruvila, I am more keen about the 4020 but if I can't find that one, then I don't mind making do with the 7020, hence on the look out for one.
 
Recently we sat down and ran my NAD 3020 against other NADs in the household. We wanted to check on whether the reputation of this second series original NAD 3020 really lives up to its reputation of being the best of the 3020s ever.

Source# TT: Technics SL3200 with Shure M44-7 / CD: Marantz CD63SE
Speakers: Macintosh XE10 floorstanders (original American Macintosh from the late 1970s)

Albums# Vinyl: Brothers in Arms (Dire Straits), Highway to hell (AC/DC) / CD: Can't Hold Back (Eddie Money), Firehouse (Firehouse), Last of the Runaways (Giant)

Session-1 / Vinyl with the following combinations:

TT -> NAD 3020 -> Macintosh XE10
TT -> NAD 3020A -> Macintosh XE10
TT -> NAD 3020 (phonostage) -> NAD C320 -> Macintosh XE10
TT -> NAD 3020A (phonostage) -> NAD C320 - > Macintosh XE10
TT -> NAD 106 (phonostage) -> NAD 3020 (Aux) -> Macintosh XE10
TT -> NAD 106 (phonostage) -> NAD 3020A (Aux) -> Macintosh XE10
TT -> NAD 106 -> NAD 216thx -> Macintosh XE10
TT -> NAD 106 (phonostage) -> NAD C320 -> Macintosh XE10

We tried out these 8 combinations with side-1 of the Brothers in Arms LP and thereafter listened to both LPs using the option listed as #1. In order of preference (from best sounding to the average sounding), heres the rank list:

#1 without doubt, its the TT -> NAD 106 (phonostage) -> NAD 3020 (Aux) -> Macintosh XE10
#2 TT -> NAD 106 (phonostage) -> NAD 3020A (Aux) -> Macintosh XE10
#3 TT -> NAD 3020A -> Macintosh XE10
#4 TT -> NAD 3020 -> Macintosh XE10
#5 TT -> NAD 106 -> NAD 216thx -> Macintosh XE10
#6 TT -> NAD 106 (phonostage) -> NAD C320 -> Macintosh XE10
#7 TT -> NAD 3020A (phonostage) -> NAD C320 - > Macintosh XE10
#8 TT -> NAD 3020 (phonostage) -> NAD C320 -> Macintosh XE10

From this assessment, it was clear that the NAD 106 preamp (upgraded version of the legendary NAD 1000 preamp) is far far superior to the NAD 3020A and NAD 3020s phonostage. The NAD 3020As phonostage is better than the 3020s phonostage (guess the capacitance loading selector puts it ahead) The 106 running through the 3020 (Aux) turned out to be the best. The sound was bright but fluid and of course, the 106s inbuilt dampening ensured that only music and as less as possible noise passed through. Bass was deep and highs free flowing (I would say, a bit on the aggressive side) while mids were rounder and fuller. Imagery was superb. Overall, very pleasurable listening. Of the 3020s, the 3020As phonostage was far better than the 3020s phonostage simply because it sounded a bit more real and upfront. The vocals and imagery were much better with the 3020As phonostage in comparision with the 3020s. Many people over time have under-estimated the quality of the 3020s poweramp. I would say that the little 3020s poweramp sounded much much better than the 216thx. The C320s poweramp could be placed in between the 2, from a ranking perspective. The 3020s poweramp (also the 3020As poweramp) seemed to sound more lively with a lot of presence and feel. The C320s poweramp was a little more laid back when compared to both the 3020s but the 216thx was definitely not in the same league. It sounded a bit dull overall and too laid back. Probably the fact that it was originally designed for cinema use results in a more dampened and dullish sound.. Probably things did not match up too well for the C320, using it with the other NAD phonostages. It sounded very out of place with vinyl (kind of like a 10000m athlete trying his hand at the 100m sprint). The sound was quite thin when compared to the other amps in the mix and lacked overall dimensions. So arrived at the final combination which I am using currently - the TT -> NAD 106 (phonostage) -> NAD 3020 (Aux) -> Macintosh XE10. Of course, I have reverted to the BPL Sanyo Floorstanders as the XE10 belongs to my brother.

Session-2 / CD with the following combinations:

CD63SE -> NAD 3020 -> Macintosh XE10
CD63SE -> NAD 3020A -> Macintosh XE10
CD63SE -> NAD C320 -> Macintosh XE10
CD63SE -> NAD 106 -> NAD 3020 (Aux) -> Macintosh XE10
CD63SE -> NAD 106 -> NAD 3020A (Aux) -> Macintosh XE10
CD63SE -> NAD 106 -> NAD 216thx -> Macintosh XE10
CD63SE -> NAD 106 -> NAD C320 -> Macintosh XE10

Tried out all 8 combos with the entire Eddie Money CD and would rank the combos as follows::

#1 CD63SE -> NAD 106 -> NAD 3020 (Aux) -> Macintosh XE10
#2 CD63SE -> NAD C320 -> Macintosh XE10
#3 CD63SE -> NAD 106 -> NAD 3020A (Aux) -> Macintosh XE10
#4 CD63SE -> NAD 3020 -> Macintosh XE10
#5 CD63SE -> NAD 3020A -> Macintosh XE10
#6 CD63SE -> NAD 106 -> NAD C320 -> Macintosh XE10
#7 CD63SE -> NAD 106 -> NAD 216thx -> Macintosh XE10

Overall the 106 driving the 3020 (through Aux) was clearly ahead but the class of the C320 was quite evident. It came a close second working directly with the cd player and speakers. What many have said about the C320 is very true. It surely is one fantastic amplifier. The only factor which tilted the victory in favour of the 106-3020 combo was the highs and the imagery. This was simply un-matchable. Much to my surprise, my existing pre-power set up came last simply because the presence and highs were on the lower side but imagery was superb. The 3020 and 3020A also played very well with the CD player wired direct but I thought the 3020 sounded more refreshing and original when compared to the 3020A which sounded a little thin in comparison. Guess the mids of the 3020 are more than the 3020A.

The overall experience was interesting and it clearly demonstrated that the mark-2 version of the original 3020 was the better amplifier of the lot, especially when paired with the NAD 106s top of the line, phono stage. The 3020 and 3020A phono stages are good too, by themselves but have less dampening, resulting in a lot of surface noise, ticks and pops being heard. The 106s phonostage amazingly keeps these down.

Overall we are happy with the results and the 106, 3020 and 216thx are definitely staying on my rig. The 3020A, C320 and XE10s have returned to my brother's rig.
 
The design of Nad 3020 paved way for a new generation of amplifiers. No competitor could come anywhere near it's price and quality at that time. Nad was one of the pioneers to take their production to Japan and then to Taiwan to bring down the cost of production. I keep a NAD 7155 which has a very good phono and has a power of 55 wpc. It is one of my all time favorites. Over a period of time, better phono stages came and when you compare them with 3020, the newer ones may give better details at the top end. But 3020 being a British design, the mid range was very prominent and it was well accepted as the norm at that time. But the listening tastes have changed since CDs came and now the details of higher frequencies are also part of the present norm which makes the phono stage of original 3020 sound second best. To put it another way, the phono stage of later models have been refined to meet the market demand. This is my observation
 
Yes, and to add to that IMO, the key year in phono history is 1983. This was the year that saw Cassette sales out do Vinyl and signalled the end of Vinyl as the dominant medium for recorded music. Both cassettes and vinyl were subsequently out done by CDs in 1985 with the release of Dire Straits' Brothers in Arms. Phonostages, on integrateds post 1983 tended to be compromised to cut costs. The dedicated plug-in phonostage also took shape as a concept as a view was taken that if someone really needed a phonostage, he/she might as well, buy one at an addional cost. So as the logic goes, integrateds and preamps in the pre-1983 era had superior phonostages. Also, a lot of tonal signatures were also goverened to some extent by the popular music of the day. Yes, most manufacturers aim to keep things standard and as close to theory as possible, but with the 1980s came the huge slant towards new genres of music like Glam Metal, Eurodance, Trance, Rap, etc where mid range was not required to a laboratory extent. The focus shifted to the lows and highs and of course, raw power. This change is evident especially on the Japanese mass-market integrateds, They tended to sound thin, in comparison to the pre-1983 equipment.



kuruvilajacob said:
The design of Nad 3020 paved way for a new generation of amplifiers. No competitor could come anywhere near it's price and quality at that time. Nad was one of the pioneers to take their production to Japan and then to Taiwan to bring down the cost of production. I keep a NAD 7155 which has a very good phono and has a power of 55 wpc. It is one of my all time favorites. Over a period of time, better phono stages came and when you compare them with 3020, the newer ones may give better details at the top end. But 3020 being a British design, the mid range was very prominent and it was well accepted as the norm at that time. But the listening tastes have changed since CDs came and now the details of higher frequencies are also part of the present norm which makes the phono stage of original 3020 sound second best. To put it another way, the phono stage of later models have been refined to meet the market demand. This is my observation
Click to expand...
 
Hi

After going through this post I decided/admire to own NAD3020 if they are still available.
Currently having Marantz PM6004 & CD6004 with KEF Q300 which are very good for CD listening but with my Technics(Panasonic) SL150 they sound FLAT/Dull.
Let me know if you come across with NAD3020 sale and request your help to decide which Vintage speakers good with it. (Having 800+ Hindi and Telugu LPs)
I like warm setup with Little Chils
 
I've got a Series 20 3020 (the 80-83 version as reuben mentioned) and the phono stage sounds very dull. The sound is rather too warm for my taste in general when played through the aux inputs, but the phono makes it very dull and veiled (compared to the phono stages on my Pioneer & Sony vintage gear) .
Will a recap or any tweaks help?
 
The warm signature is the classic NAD house sound. Is your existing setup Japanese mass-market? If yes, then all NADs are likely to sound dull and boring. I encountered this experience when I first switched to NAD
 
I have a pioneer SA 606 hooked up to a Pair of DIY floorstanders, and used to have a sony STR 242L Reciever hooked up to a pair of B&W Vision DS3's

It's just the phono stages of these amps. I used the phono stage of the STR242L to hook up my second TT, and it sounded ok on the NAD when connected via aux in. It's just the internal phono stage that sounds so dull

I'm using the NAD as a phono stage right now hooked up to a Logitech Z2300 with upgraded DIY satellites.
 
the highs are very veiled, and the treble controls have only a small impact, and over a smaller frequency band. When i use the phono stage in the amp, there is a significant loss of detail compared to the pio/sony amp phono stages
 
greenhorn said:
the highs are very veiled, and the treble controls have only a small impact, and over a smaller frequency band. When i use the phono stage in the amp, there is a significant loss of detail compared to the pio/sony amp phono stages
Click to expand...

which model of 3020 is it? If you don't like it, you can always sell it to me. I was on the look out for a second one
 
reubensm said:
which model of 3020 is it? If you don't like it, you can always sell it to me. I was on the look out for a second one
Click to expand...
:D

Hey It's just a transistor circuit - I'm sure playing around with the impedance or something else should be able to fix it.

The amp stage seems fine.It's the one with the transformer fixed to the back panel
 
Folks, i am owning a NAD D3020 since 1 year, though its a new version of the old legend.

I want to know, if you guys compared the sound of this one with the old legend :) any opnions?

This was my first NAD and i extremely love the sound quality, in the last 1 years heard different amps, but never liked anything better than this.

i am now addicted to NAD sound and eventually upgraded by HT setup as well from Denon to NAD.
 
Hey guys, just came across this thread. Great to see other 3020 lovers out there....I know they are classic little amps, but I had no idea of the following they get.
I picked mine up about 20 years ago for a little bedroom system. Still running strong now, although I use it as my PC amp. Here's a picture of it.....unfortunately missing a button :-(
Never been able to locate a replacement.

2015-05-30 12.17.16 1024.jpg
 
Peimad said:
Hey guys, just came across this thread. Great to see other 3020 lovers out there....I know they are classic little amps, but I had no idea of the following they get.
I picked mine up about 20 years ago for a little bedroom system. Still running strong now, although I use it as my PC amp. Here's a picture of it.....unfortunately missing a button :-(
Never been able to locate a replacement.

View attachment 18201
Click to expand...

Looks in lovely shape. You may not be able to find the silver button but you may have better luck with a stock grey button. Just get one and get it spray-painted :)

I have 2 original 3020s
 
Last edited:
Special Offer: Wharfedale EVO 4.2 Speakers
Get the Wharfedale EVO 4.2 3-Way Standmount Speakers at a Special Offer Price.

Similar threads

SilverNAD
NAD 3020 Transformer Specs
Replies
16
Views
6K
Ja1nuszK
J
tnvijay
My DIY stereo 807 Single Ended Amplifier
Replies
1
Views
4K
FlaCharlie
F
F
My 10 Year Old Granddaughter Builds a Tube Amp
Replies
10
Views
7K
linuxguru
L
Nagaraj S
O&B SSM 2100 9-channel power amplifier: A brief review.
Replies
10
Views
2K
[email protected]
B
R
NAD M33 Amplifier Review
Replies
10
Views
10K
Prateek-Epitome
P
Back
Top