NAD Amplifiers Are They Any Good?

[HypnoToad]

I notice a lot of NAD equipment on Ebay, I heard they are very good quality.

They mainly seem to be around the 30 - 50 watts per channel but they state they have much more than that.

Is this true and do NAD really have such great products as the people selling them say they are?

I wouldn't mind getting a NAD reciever and another power amp to use in a bi-amp setup, if they perform like they say they do.

Any advice would be appreciated.

 

[Marantz 500]

In my experience - very good sound quality, but mediocre build quality. You often get better sound than you paid for, but reliability can be so-so...
I've had four integrated Nad amps during the last few years.

 

[AltecDarpa]

NAD has high dynamic headroom, a 100wpc amp will be built to deliver up to say 300 wpc in dynamic bursts, giving 6 or more db of head room, my father has been driving a pair of Infinity Kappa 7.1's for close to 20 years with a NAD power envelope amplifier with out any trouble.

 

[chasaboo]

Had a NAD integrated amp in the 80s. Sounded amazing but it had more than a few visits to the shop for repairs.

 

[zenith2134]

The New Acoustic Dimension! Of course they sound good. But, as others have noted, they breakdown a lot.

 

[Impedance]

I've got a NAD surround sound reciever from the early 90s or so. Not 5.1 surround, just dolby logic... I bought it (used) cheap so I could hook up a dvd player. It's just ok.
The sound is fine and it has never broken on me, but I'm not blown away by it either.

A good friend has been running his NAD integrated amp for close to 15 years with no issues, and I think it has great sound. If you're buying used, be sure you research the exact model; some do better than others.

 

[Dan ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ]

The earliest NAD's were flaky as Aunt Tillie's pie crust, but in my experience improved greatly by the late 80's.
My 7240PE receiver has been going strong for 22 years. Great audio quality too.

 

[ponderbear]

The earliest NAD's were flaky as Aunt Tillie's pie crust

mmm. pie. I could use a piece right now.

I've had several pieces of NAD over the years: preamps, power amps, integrated, receivers, turntables, a cassette deck. The cassette deck I had was horrible. I liked the preamp a lot (1130) but sold it. the amplifiers were all okay, did the job, but I sold them too. I kept trying NAD stuff but almost always ended up selling it. No real commitment to the sound on my part. Although, my favorite turntable is still the NAD 5120, which I would never sell.

Summary: their sound and my feelings are quite neutral.

 

[Dan ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ]

Yeah, out of the early pieces, I had a cassette deck with a fine tuning on the bias. The deck pretty much sucked though and couldn't hold a candle to my Akai. I had one analog tuner which had ongoing alignment problems, but otherwise offered fine sound and performance. The 3020 was a dandy is still working without a single repair job. (I sold it back in the 80's when I got my 7240PE.)

 

[legalalien]

I've owned an early integrated (the venerable 3020) and more recently a mid 90's HT receiver AV711 and was lucky that they both were very reiliable and solid performers. I have read though about reliability issues for years so if possible I'd make sure to have the unit checked out before buying.

 

[Dan ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ]

I had a L40 CD-Receiver for a few years for use in a second system. I found it to be well made and offered fine audio from its 3020 sourced amp. The only thing lacking was the CDP which didn't handle disc errors well.

 

[stuartk]

I had a 1020 preamp at one point. I had read a lot about the 3020 integrated amp, but I decided to build a Hafler DH-220 from a kit, so I got the 1020 to use with that since I heard it was the same as the preamp in the 3020.

They evidently had a lot of problems with quality control. I had to have it serviced several times under warranty.

It was fine after that though. One of my brothers is still using it.

The 1020 always sounded pretty good, but I found another brand that had a better phono section, so I moved on.

 

[egl333]

I have many friends that had NAD comonents that were very prone to needing repairs. Personally I think the NAD components were comparable to most stereo brands, definitely NOT any better sound yet ugly visual appearance. NAD stands for Negative Audio Dependability and among techs NAD stands for Not Another Defect.

 

[JohnVF]

Last weekend I sat and listened to a pair of $4000 speakers being driven by an NAD integrated amp (albeit a pretty substantial one, don't know the model#, though). If it says anything about the sound, when I walked into the listening room all of the McIntosh equipment was lit up,and I turned all the volume knobs on the Mc stuff trying to turn it up, with no result. Then I realized the sound was coming from the NAD, which really surprised me. Either the speakers were that good, or the NAD was that good, or (most likely) a very decent amp was driving very excellent speakers. I had no complaints about the sound, and actually have never had complaints about NAD's sound. A friend of mine has the 320bee and loves it, another friend has one of their 5.1 dolby digital receivers and it sounded much better that I expected. If they're QC problems have been fixed (I have no idea if they have) then they are a whole lot of bang for the buck.

 

[stuartk]

I have many friends that had NAD comonents that were very prone to needing repairs. Personally I think the NAD components were comparable to most stereo brands, definitely NOT any better sound yet ugly visual appearance.

I've always liked the way they look. They're not plain featureless boxes like some gear, yet they're not dripping with flashing lights and shiny stuff either.

Their color scheme has always been subdued, but I don't mind that.

 

[chasaboo]

I've always liked the way they look. They're not plain featureless boxes like some gear, yet they're not dripping with flashing lights and shiny stuff either.

Their color scheme has always been subdued, but I don't mind that.

You're right, it's a muted style that's appealing I think to tech types. Me being one of them!

 

[ponderbear]

I've always liked the way they look.

Oh yeah, me too, that's why i can't help buying the stuff over and over again.

I've recently taken a shine to Proton. I've heard that it's made by the same people- not sure but it sure seems like it. I like the Proton look a tad better. They seem quite similar in other respects. I respect their tuners but admit I have never played with a NAD tuner to compare.

 

[Chazb11]

I think the NAD stuff is a very good value, alotta bang for the buck! Some people think they are too "cool" sounding, or sterile. My opinion is that they are very neutral sounding, which is what I happen to like!

 

[KentTeffeteller]

Their big feature is peak headroom. They are usually 30-40 WPC but can do 100 watts on brief peaks. Weak point is their build quality. Stands for Not Another Defective or Negative Audio Denial.

 

[justw]

I've had a 317 integrated amp for about 8 years. No troubles and it drives my ADS L500's as well as anything. It replaced a Hafler DH200 / 101 combo that definitely had a better low end.