NAD 325 vs 326

Thanks for another wonderful review, Art. Have you been able to listen to it on your main rig, by any chance? Because I read that the 325 is recommended only for a budget system. It's shortcomings become apparent once it's paired with more revealing speakers of higher end. That's just what I read from a reviewer at WhatHifi. And I doubt it.

p.s. I'm still set on Unico P, although the pairing of 326 with a tube preamp seem pretty appealing atm.
 
Thanks for another wonderful review, Art. Have you been able to listen to it on your main rig, by any chance? Because I read that the 325 is recommended only for a budget system. It's shortcomings become apparent once it's paired with more revealing speakers of higher end. That's just what I read from a reviewer at WhatHifi. And I doubt it.

p.s. I'm still set on Unico P, although the pairing of 326 with a tube preamp seem pretty appealing atm.

I did put it in my reference system, and it is not in the same league as my Sonneteer and it became obvious immediately. The Sonneteer does several things better than any amp I've ever heard and once you've heard it's strengths paired with speakers that can reveal all of it's attributes and any other amps weaknesses well, you can guess the rest.

The NAD would be good with many very nice speakers and perhaps even Harbeth if you haven't heard them with the Alabaster first.
 
Oh I didn't really dislike it. I unfairly compared it to my Sonneteer and it came up lacking...sorely. I also took issue with Paul Seydor claiming it would be a good buy even at 4 times the price as that is utter hogwash. It is however a great $500 amp and does nothing offensive or wrong and with gear that is appropriate it can sound wonderful. My wife's setup with a C325BEE and Era Design speakers sounds very nice.
Well, my work has been branded by worse epithets than "hogwash" so I'll let that pass, but respectfully point out to Enthusiast2 that four times $500 is only two grand, which in the case of the NAD would get you a 50/channel full-featured unit that sounds superb. I am unfamiliar with the amp you refer to, but I am familiar with several other units that cost between $500 and two grand, and very few of them have any sort of leg up on the NAD with regard it specific mix of features, design, and performance. In any case, I did not say it was better than anything else, merely that it is highly competitive and that at its asking price, it simply has no peers. And I'll remind you that I did audition it extensively on both Quad 2805s and original ESL 57s (Wayne Piquet restored), not to mention Harbeth HLP3Es--surely no one can complain that these an unrevealing monitors! The NAD was not only not caught out in such august company, it complemented them very well. I'll emphasize what I said in my review: if had only about, say, $11k to spend on a CD-based system, I would unhesitatingly buy Quad 2805s, this NAD integrated, and one from any number of reputable CD players (Marantz, Oppo, etc.). And, yes, the Golden Ear award was given precisely to irritate folks such as yourself!
 
I'll emphasize again, btw, that NAD is an extremely neutral sounding unit, so I remain suspicious of claims that it comes up "lacking"next to something else, as most of the time that something turns out to be a particular flavor of one sort or another. Nothing wrong that--I have mine that I'm very fond of as well. But the NAD traffics in very little of this, so it's unlikely to acquire cult followings and passionate loyalties. But it will reproduce what is on your recordings accurately.
 
Well said, Paul. As a fan of NAD gear (though I only own one piece) I agreed with your review when I read it. The "N" in NAD could easily stand for "neutral".
 
Last edited:
Well, my work has been branded by worse epithets than "hogwash" so I'll let that pass, but respectfully point out to Enthusiast2 that four times $500 is only two grand, which in the case of the NAD would get you a 50/channel full-featured unit that sounds superb. I am unfamiliar with the amp you refer to, but I am familiar with several other units that cost between $500 and two grand, and very few of them have any sort of leg up on the NAD with regard it specific mix of features, design, and performance. In any case, I did not say it was better than anything else, merely that it is highly competitive and that at its asking price, it simply has no peers. And I'll remind you that I did audition it extensively on both Quad 2805s and original ESL 57s (Wayne Piquet restored), not to mention Harbeth HLP3Es--surely no one can complain that these an unrevealing monitors! The NAD was not only not caught out in such august company, it complemented them very well. I'll emphasize what I said in my review: if had only about, say, $11k to spend on a CD-based system, I would unhesitatingly buy Quad 2805s, this NAD integrated, and one from any number of reputable CD players (Marantz, Oppo, etc.). And, yes, the Golden Ear award was given precisely to irritate folks such as yourself!

We have the C325BEE and the C326BEE in our home and have used them with Harbeth P3ESR's...as you said "surely no one can complain that these an unrevealing monitors!" and I certainly would not argue that.

"In any case, I did not say it was better than anything else". You understand by reading my post that I did not state that you said the above. What I said was "Paul Seydor claiming it would be a good buy even at 4 times the price", a far cry from better than anything else. In another post I linked your review so that folks could read the whole review for themselves rather than take quotes as they can always be taken out of context.

I've listened to and owned a bunch of mid fi amps and I think that both the 325 and the 326 are very fine amps who's sins are more of omission than commission. The sound, as I have stated, is inoffensive and also unexciting. Neutral...what is that exactly? I believe that neutral means that a piece is close to exhibiting no coloration. All components exhibit some coloration and I know that you are speaking in relative terms but I feel that the 326 is a good distance to the warm side of neutral.

When I discuss amps I'm usually talking about sound and not features. My 326 has a whole host of features that my Sonneteer does not. Including a remote and sub out. Still I wouldn't trade for anything. The NAD simply misses too much of the music for me to live with it happily. In the context of a budget setup it's a very good performer at the next level it's the weak link.

I would also ask that when you decide to drop in and discuss the merits of what someone has stated relative to your reviews that you check all of their posts on the subject. I posted on this subject subsequent to the post you quoted and clarified my statement further. It was in a different thread but on subject.

You did see where I stated that I was happy to see an inxpensive unit such as the 326 get so much attention. So as I said, the Golden Ear not only didn't irritate me it tickled me.

Glad you could visit us here and make your position clear.

Perhaps you could get a hold of May Audio and pick up a Sonneteer Alabaster or Orton to review. That way you could confirm your suspicions.
 
I know this is an old post, but I purchased a C326BEE before Christmas since I really liked the C325BEE that my brother-in-law has in his main listening system. I took it up to there home over the break to do a sound comparison. We both found my C326BEE lacking in every aspect. Sound stage was not as “3-D”, detail on the high end especially cymbals was lacking and the bass was not tight and punchy. Perhaps it just will take a few weeks of break in to open it up. I am used to vintage equipment that I upgrade and have found it does take some time to make the unit sound best.
 
Back
Top Bottom