If I may ask the cost of the combo … ?
NAD OWNERS THREAD
- Thread starter Kumar442244
- Start date
reubensm
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the query, have shared the details via PM.
Aquired an used NAD 317 integrated amplifier 80 Watss for 16K ( without remote). Got an AC adaptor since this is 110V.
My Yahama R-N602 was sounding good on Q Acoustics 3050i but I need to crank up the volume from -25 to-18 dB to get decent sound. This NAD is way too powerful. I get more than enough sound when the volume nobe is at 9 o Clock. Using the soft clipping feature softens the output a little bit. More impressions soon after I have some more listening sessions
My Yahama R-N602 was sounding good on Q Acoustics 3050i but I need to crank up the volume from -25 to-18 dB to get decent sound. This NAD is way too powerful. I get more than enough sound when the volume nobe is at 9 o Clock. Using the soft clipping feature softens the output a little bit. More impressions soon after I have some more listening sessions
Last edited:
80 hours of listening - can understand thatYes, that's the NAD signature sound for you - very warm, laid back and not aggressive at all. From all the NADs I've owned or listened to, some of the earlier NADs featured BASS EQ or Loudness Controls. These NADs were more aggressive. The more modern ones are less aggressive and smooth. Most NAD users listen to their NADs with tone-defeat as well. I use a 3020 amplifier which has a loudness control. If the loudness is turned off, one gets the signature NAD sound. With the loudness on, the bass attach and highs improve. I always play it with the loudness on. The C32x series of NAD are famous for their sound dimensions. Free flowing sound, warm and natural sounding. The sound gets warmer and smoother, and stereo dimensions increase with burn in. In my personal opinion, a NAD requires about 60-80 hours of burn in to bring out its signature and about 4-5 years of working (regular listening) for it to reach its peak. But these are my personal opinions based on my experiences with various NAD amplifiers. And for the record, I have never owned a NAD from new. My experiences are based on pre-used NADs and recapped NADs.
I have used a supplementary tweeter with each channel for improving highs. You can actually do this with a few bucks. Get to your corner store, get hold of 2 small low cost tweeters and connect each one in series with a 10mfd capacitor each. across each speaker. Your highs will drastically improve without literally any investment. You can vary the capacitance with 1 mfd, 2.2mfd and 4.7 mfd capacitors if your supplementary tweeters sound too loudIf you have a couple of old tweeters from a car entertainment unit, these would work as well
Don't change your current speakers, NADs are designed to drive a variety of speakers. You'd almost surely experience a similar sound signature with most speakers that you would try.
4-5 years of regular listening for it reach peak performance ? Is that a typo ?
About NAD amps having good power amp section, I tend to agree. Have used a tube pre and nad power for years.
Full disclosure power. Now I know why there is a big fat torroidal transformer in the middle. lts like the entire amp circuits are build around it. My amp can be bridged upto 240 watts!
I can tell you from my C320, it powers way beyond what they say it drives my 82db speakers very easily
reubensm
Well-Known Member
The design philosophy of NAD is different. In layman's terms, what they've done essentially is to use 2 independent power sources from the same large power transformer (2 separate secondaries). One transformer secondary is usually of high amperage (between 4 and 15 amps depending on the amp model), is rectified and filtered with a large capacitor bank (number of filter caps varies from model to model), and is left unregulated. This section specifically powers the output transistors and the driver stages (these driver transistors directly feed the output transistors). The capacictor bank and the unregulated high amperage power allows the amp to produce huge continuous power outputs irrespective of the speaker load and impendence. The other transformer secondary has a low amperage output (usually about 1 amp) which is rectified, filtered and regulated for powering the pre-driver stages and preamplifier stages (preamplifier stages are specific to integrated amps, for NAD poweramps, they have what is called an input amplifier stage for soft start, etc). Thus the power requirements of the amp are met separately, even though a single transformer is used. The benefit is that these amplifiers have a huge reserve of continuous power which makes them sound louder and even produce outputs way beyond their output ratings (there is also the angle of misconception, users often view NAD's power rating specs with the PMPO ideology in mind and are pleasantly surprised to find a NAD 30 watt amp sounding louder than a Sony 2000 watt PMPO amp
)
Last edited:
reubensm
Well-Known Member
Funny but true. I have noticed this specifically in NAD amps that I've owned. The amps with their baked but functional original electrolytic caps from the early 1980s tend to sound better than recapped ones, even after 5-6 years of use (high quality nichicon or rubycon replacements). But unfortunately with reference to the George Harrison song - All things must pass, all electrolytic caps will eventually need to be changed.
Shammi Dang
Active Member
I have the same Model, C325BEE. Using since last 15 years. Great amp, no drop in performance. Sound as good as the first day. Remote vol not working but that's not a big issue. I am currently using Wharfedale Evo 4.1 bookshelf spks with this amp.The old NADs are perhaps some of the most underrated amplifiers of all time. I came into ownership of a C325BEE last year and I am wondering why transistor amps get a bad rap relative to Tubes when there is something like the C325. This SS amp has me questioning my allegiance to tubes. it plays nice with a variety of speakers especially affordable British stand mounts. It makes modest power, perhaps one needs to be as careful in finding speakers as once would with tube amplifiers. It’s not neutral, the bass is nice and prominent but it has a snap to it. Everyone raves about the midrange and rightfully so, but the treble too is grain less and sweet. It can throw an image assuming the speakers are up to it. It has dynamics. Best of all, It sounds great with all of the music that you grew up with - CCR, the Doors, the Rolling Stones, Steely Dan, Paul Simon, Grareful Dead, the Who, CSNY and on and on - all sound terrific. You can listen to this all day and be entertained. The NAD C325BEE is a classic in my book and the designer Bjorn Erik Edvardsen was a genius. Now I’ve got to listen to his first design the C3020.
BEE passed away in 2019. Remarkable body of work.
Tribute to a Legend, Bjørn-Erik Edvardsen - NAD Electronics
On December 16, 2018, Bjørn-Erik Edvardsen (“Erik”), one of NAD Electronics’ foundational personalities, passed away after a courageous battle with Myeloma/Bone Cancer. NAD’s entire worldwide family … its board and staff, its distributors, its dealers and our millions of worldwide fans and music...nadelectronics.com
reubensm
Well-Known Member
You can actually program any Universal Remote to work with NAD amplifiers, preamplifiers, receivers, cd players, etc that have the remote control feature. NAD provides the codes here, under the Pronto remote controller codes section. Download the zip file and run the file NADtoPronto.exe, set the filter to list by model and select your C325BEE. You'll get the codes.
spirovious
Well-Known Member
Even with IR blaster featured phone,one can set Nad remote.
Shammi Dang
Active Member
Ok I will check
This is how its normally or atleast the amps I have seen.The design philosophy of NAD is different. In layman's terms, what they've done essentially is to use 2 independent power sources from the same large power transformer (2 separate secondaries). One transformer secondary is usually of high amperage (between 4 and 15 amps depending on the amp model), is rectified and filtered with a large capacitor bank (number of filter caps varies from model to model), and is left unregulated. This section specifically powers the output transistors and the driver stages (these driver transistors directly feed the output transistors). The capacictor bank and the unregulated high amperage power allows the amp to produce huge continuous power outputs irrespective of the speaker load and impendence. The other transformer secondary has a low amperage output (usually about 1 amp) which is rectified, filtered and regulated for powering the pre-driver stages and preamplifier stages (preamplifier stages are specific to integrated amps, for NAD poweramps, they have what is called an input amplifier stage for soft start, etc). Thus the power requirements of the amp are met separately, even though a single transformer is used. The benefit is that these amplifiers have a huge reserve of continuous power which makes them sound louder and even produce outputs way beyond their output ratings (there is also the angle of misconception, users often view NAD's power rating specs with the PMPO ideology in mind and are pleasantly surprised to find a NAD 30 watt amp sounding louder than a Sony 2000 watt PMPO amp
reubensm
Well-Known Member
Good to know folks have started copying NAD. This concept was originally developed at NAD's research labs by engineer Phill Marshall and later refined by the legendary Bjorn Erik Edvardsen. The trick is simple but delivers generous headroom, which means dynamic power bursts far in excess of the amplifier's power rating thereby creating the illusion that NAD amps are significantly louder than what they are expected to be. The stunning benefit of this design is their amps are capable of driving low efficiency speakers with ease and even speakers with impedances as low as 2 ohms. Examples of branding used are for this feature are Power Envelope and PowerDrive. Great stuff, especially for fans of the NAD brand
Tribute to Bjorn Erik Edvardsen
Last edited:
Shammi Dang
Active Member
Thanks, I am able to do with one of my old (not in use phone - Mi4)
Thanks a ton for your input. My old phone Mi4 that is not in use came handy. It had inbuilt remote app and is IR enabled. So I have set it up. Works fine - power, mute and volume. Selector function is not possible. Basically my problem is solved mainly of controlling volume remotely. Alternatively I downloaded one app from Nad for universal amp remotes but sadly this model of Amp is not covered. So I am fine with Mi inbuilt app.
reubensm
Well-Known Member
Dears, a lot of our FMs have been 'silently' watching or enquiring about NAD amplifiers and I get quite a few enquiries, not that i am an expert but try to help out whenever possible. Thought I'll post a few of these questions here for general reading:
Q-1, Recently a FM enquired about buying the NAD 1020 preamplifier and whether it would produce the same 3020 sound signature with a more powerful power-amp, which is not NAD (the question was the outcome of an advert seen on olx.in)
Ans - that was the original reason why NAD came out with the 1020. However from my personal experience, the 3020 magic is somehow missing when the 1020 is used with other power amplifiers and even with NAD power amplifiers. Honestly I don't know the reason but somehow I have noticed that the magic is missing. My suggestion would be not to invest in a 1020 preamplifier and look out for a 3020 integrated amp instead. The reason is simple, you can use the 3020 amp as a preamp or as an integrated (or even as a power-amp) whereas a 1020 will function only as a preamp. The 1020 is essentially a 3020 without the power-amp section mounted, without the level indicator and with a separate headphone amp and smaller power transformer. Here is a picture of the inside:
Q-2, which is better to buy, a NAD integrated or NAD component preamplifier and power amplifier?
Ans - its a very subjective question and depends on factors like how you intend to use the amp, what kind of budget, etc. Integrateds are convenient as everything is in a single box while component preamps and power amps offer a lot of flexibility, greater number of matched inputs and the benefits of discrete circuitry and power supplies. If going for component preamplifiers and poweramplifiers, you'd need to keep an eye on the model and what is inside the box. Some of the older NAD preamps tended to be preamp stages of existing integrated amplifiers, and similarly, older power amps were simply the power amp sections of existing integrateds. Hence the only advantage would have been with the discrete power supplies with everything else being the same. For these models, it always made sense to buy the integrated amp instead and use the preamp section or power amp section separately or as a combination, per your requirement. Here is an integrated vs power amp example:
NAD 3150 vs NAD 2150 (note the difference in the model number, it is sort of standard nomenclature for NAD)
Q-3, I have been considering the NAD Silverline series. The claims are that they are audiophile equipment but online reviews are not great. The price quoted is over 6-digits. Is it worth it?
Ans - not sure if it is right to comment on the price as this is dependent on several factors like cosmetics, ownership history, service history, age, etc. However personally speaking, I have always preferred preamplifiers with tone controls. The S100 preamp does not feature tone controls but has XLR outs, gold plated RCAs, a high quality PCB and high quality components. A similar preamplifier without tone controls and with XLRs would be the NAD 116 preamplifier. I haven't heard the S100 preamp so cannot really comment on performance. You'll have to audition it and ascertain whether it sounds good to your ears. With regard to the S200 poweramp, well its a superbly built amplifier, a very good looking and solid cabinet, a very high quality PCB and components, gold plated RCAs and speaker posts, XLR inputs. It is built like a tank and very powerful, thanks to its huge tranny. However if you are on a budget and would like to enjoy the perks of the S200 at a lower price point, I suggest you look at the 218thx. These are absolutely identical power amplifiers, with exactly the same topology and design, except the 218thx is NAD old school with a standard PCB, components, etc. Also the 218thx can be rack mounted and as a result has 2 large handles on the faceplate. The 218thx is a superb power amplifier and is built like a tank. The advantage with the 218 is that it costs a lot less.
NAD 218thx vs NAD S200
Q-4, Is it worth investing in a NAD PP3 phono stage? Will I get the same performance as my NAD 304 integrated amplifier's phono stage?
The PP3 has a MC/MM cart input while the 304 has only a MM input. The PP3 offers an OP Amp based IC design where as the 304 uses discrete transistor topology. The PP3 has the a line in which is switchable with the phono section and offers a USB out for wiring to a PC, enabling you to digitize your records or any other content via the source that you are feeding in via the line in. The PP3 offers all these features while the phono stage of the 304 is a pure phono stage that can be accessed via the tape output without tone controls and the preamp output with tone controls. Both sound nice but personally I thought the 304's phono stage was a lot quieter and hence smoother. But its all down to individual choice and what features you are looking for. If you need a MC input and the digitizing feature, then you cant have these on the 304..
Q-1, Recently a FM enquired about buying the NAD 1020 preamplifier and whether it would produce the same 3020 sound signature with a more powerful power-amp, which is not NAD (the question was the outcome of an advert seen on olx.in)
Ans - that was the original reason why NAD came out with the 1020. However from my personal experience, the 3020 magic is somehow missing when the 1020 is used with other power amplifiers and even with NAD power amplifiers. Honestly I don't know the reason but somehow I have noticed that the magic is missing. My suggestion would be not to invest in a 1020 preamplifier and look out for a 3020 integrated amp instead. The reason is simple, you can use the 3020 amp as a preamp or as an integrated (or even as a power-amp) whereas a 1020 will function only as a preamp. The 1020 is essentially a 3020 without the power-amp section mounted, without the level indicator and with a separate headphone amp and smaller power transformer. Here is a picture of the inside:
Q-2, which is better to buy, a NAD integrated or NAD component preamplifier and power amplifier?
Ans - its a very subjective question and depends on factors like how you intend to use the amp, what kind of budget, etc. Integrateds are convenient as everything is in a single box while component preamps and power amps offer a lot of flexibility, greater number of matched inputs and the benefits of discrete circuitry and power supplies. If going for component preamplifiers and poweramplifiers, you'd need to keep an eye on the model and what is inside the box. Some of the older NAD preamps tended to be preamp stages of existing integrated amplifiers, and similarly, older power amps were simply the power amp sections of existing integrateds. Hence the only advantage would have been with the discrete power supplies with everything else being the same. For these models, it always made sense to buy the integrated amp instead and use the preamp section or power amp section separately or as a combination, per your requirement. Here is an integrated vs power amp example:
NAD 3150 vs NAD 2150 (note the difference in the model number, it is sort of standard nomenclature for NAD)
Q-3, I have been considering the NAD Silverline series. The claims are that they are audiophile equipment but online reviews are not great. The price quoted is over 6-digits. Is it worth it?
Ans - not sure if it is right to comment on the price as this is dependent on several factors like cosmetics, ownership history, service history, age, etc. However personally speaking, I have always preferred preamplifiers with tone controls. The S100 preamp does not feature tone controls but has XLR outs, gold plated RCAs, a high quality PCB and high quality components. A similar preamplifier without tone controls and with XLRs would be the NAD 116 preamplifier. I haven't heard the S100 preamp so cannot really comment on performance. You'll have to audition it and ascertain whether it sounds good to your ears. With regard to the S200 poweramp, well its a superbly built amplifier, a very good looking and solid cabinet, a very high quality PCB and components, gold plated RCAs and speaker posts, XLR inputs. It is built like a tank and very powerful, thanks to its huge tranny. However if you are on a budget and would like to enjoy the perks of the S200 at a lower price point, I suggest you look at the 218thx. These are absolutely identical power amplifiers, with exactly the same topology and design, except the 218thx is NAD old school with a standard PCB, components, etc. Also the 218thx can be rack mounted and as a result has 2 large handles on the faceplate. The 218thx is a superb power amplifier and is built like a tank. The advantage with the 218 is that it costs a lot less.
NAD 218thx vs NAD S200
Q-4, Is it worth investing in a NAD PP3 phono stage? Will I get the same performance as my NAD 304 integrated amplifier's phono stage?
The PP3 has a MC/MM cart input while the 304 has only a MM input. The PP3 offers an OP Amp based IC design where as the 304 uses discrete transistor topology. The PP3 has the a line in which is switchable with the phono section and offers a USB out for wiring to a PC, enabling you to digitize your records or any other content via the source that you are feeding in via the line in. The PP3 offers all these features while the phono stage of the 304 is a pure phono stage that can be accessed via the tape output without tone controls and the preamp output with tone controls. Both sound nice but personally I thought the 304's phono stage was a lot quieter and hence smoother. But its all down to individual choice and what features you are looking for. If you need a MC input and the digitizing feature, then you cant have these on the 304..
Prijith
New Member
Hi Reuben what about NAD 3240 PE.?Yes, that's the NAD signature sound for you - very warm, laid back and not aggressive at all. From all the NADs I've owned or listened to, some of the earlier NADs featured BASS EQ or Loudness Controls. These NADs were more aggressive. The more modern ones are less aggressive and smooth. Most NAD users listen to their NADs with tone-defeat as well. I use a 3020 amplifier which has a loudness control. If the loudness is turned off, one gets the signature NAD sound. With the loudness on, the bass attach and highs improve. I always play it with the loudness on. The C32x series of NAD are famous for their sound dimensions. Free flowing sound, warm and natural sounding. The sound gets warmer and smoother, and stereo dimensions increase with burn in. In my personal opinion, a NAD requires about 60-80 hours of burn in to bring out its signature and about 4-5 years of working (regular listening) for it to reach its peak. But these are my personal opinions based on my experiences with various NAD amplifiers. And for the record, I have never owned a NAD from new. My experiences are based on pre-used NADs and recapped NADs.
I have used a supplementary tweeter with each channel for improving highs. You can actually do this with a few bucks. Get to your corner store, get hold of 2 small low cost tweeters and connect each one in series with a 10mfd capacitor each. across each speaker. Your highs will drastically improve without literally any investment. You can vary the capacitance with 1 mfd, 2.2mfd and 4.7 mfd capacitors if your supplementary tweeters sound too loud
Don't change your current speakers, NADs are designed to drive a variety of speakers. You'd almost surely experience a similar sound signature with most speakers that you would try.
Silverline series were excellent. I wonder who is selling them NOS or used. If they are grab it.
A beautiful, well-constructed speaker with class-leading soundstage, imaging and bass that is fast, deep, and precise.
Similar threads
