Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › NAD Receiver beats LD MKIVse??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NAD Receiver beats LD MKIVse?? - Page 3

post #31 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by vvanrij View Post
@wae5: Hmm, but I know the sound can be better, audible better, so if I spend money on something I want to 'upgrade', not to sidestep and say wow cool, it costs 300euro, looks very different, but sounds the same! Then I would rather save up and go for a real 'leap' if thats still possible at this level

edit: I don't have the slightest clue what this bloke above me tried to explain sorry majkel, lets start with, what is a CDP
CDP = CD player?
post #32 of 191

NAD

NAD makes some good gear...suprizingly good sometimes!
post #33 of 191

So hard to say

Quote:
Originally Posted by Navyblue View Post
Just wondering, do you also mean that MkIVSE and MkV are largely indistinguishable to you?
The short answer is hearing distinctions between excellent amps takes time because the differences are subtle at best. My MKV is too new to make a definitive comparison and I’ve been listening to it connected to the MKIV SE used as a pre amp. I’ve just started listening again to the MKIV SE as a stand alone amp and it sounds warmer and fuller but to say otherwise would make me sound like a fool so I won’t. I’ll know I’ve made a distinction when I develop a preference and only then will I attempt to put that distinction into words. If you’re trying to decide which amp to buy, I’d recommend the LD MKIII tube amp even though I haven’t heard it. Why? Because when you buy a tube amp you’re really paying for euphonic distortion so choosing one tube amp rather than another is like picking one ice cream flavor rather than another. Little Dot gives you 30 days to decide if the amp is for you and at $200 it's a very good deal. I’m listening to Mendelssohn’s Piano Trios on my K501s connected to the MKIV SE and want to say it’s ravishing but I just took a shower so I won’t.
post #34 of 191
Thread Starter 
Thats rather odd, how can you compare a CD player's headphone out to an AMP's headphone out?? They work on very different principes, and like Tim truthfully said, the amp is made to amplify the signal, whether it is for speakers or headphones.
post #35 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by vvanrij View Post
Thats rather odd, how can you compare a CD player's headphone out to an AMP's headphone out?? They work on very different principes, and like Tim truthfully said, the amp is made to amplify the signal, whether it is for speakers or headphones.
But they don't work on different principles at all. The CDP's headphone out is driven by a "headphone amp." It may be a simple one, built around op amps. It may not be the best, but if it has a volume knob and amplifies the sound above line level, there is an amp in there, with the same basic objective as any amp.

Tim
post #36 of 191
My NAD C372's headphone out is pretty damn good too...
post #37 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrTv View Post
I; however, have different impression.
I own C372, highest model in their Silver Line series, but my impression of its headphone out is not that good. I tried using it with my Senn650, and AKG 240Monitor (600 Ohms version) and found that it drove my phones very badly.

I wonder if you could enlarge on that. Drove your phones very badly in what way? The C372 is a quality unit and it's unlikely NAD have neglected its HP out so your impressions are relevant in comparison to the very different findings of other posters--including, I see, one other with a C372.
post #38 of 191
Yeah, I have the c352, which I assume has the exact same hp output as c372, and it sounds quite good, not quite as good as through my Atoll hp out, but pretty darn good. Can't really imagine that the c372 is that bad, but "to each, his own".
post #39 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by pp312 View Post
I wonder if you could enlarge on that. Drove your phones very badly in what way? The C372 is a quality unit and it's unlikely NAD have neglected its HP out so your impressions are relevant in comparison to the very different findings of other posters--including, I see, one other with a C372.
Well, here is my elaboration.

FYI, I'm currently using C372 with a pair of Totem Rainmaker and it drives them beautifully. Other components are Arcam Diva73 (CDP), Audioquest Colorado interconnect, and Hovland Mainline ac cord with Wattgate on both ends. I'm really love the sound and synergy with my speaker set.

Actually, the amp drives my AKG decently, but it's not as good with Senn 650.

This is what I experienced when using C372 with the Senn:
- bloated bass
- lack of quality treble (roll off and lack of sparkle)
- a bit muddy mid.

When I first switched to a dedicated head-amp my dad made for studio monitoring, I found that, though it's cheap and wasn’t made with audiophile in mind, it drove my Senn somewhat better than C372 (better bass, a bit better treble).

However, things changed like night and day when I switched to DV332, especially when tubes upgrade taken into account.

I don’t know why my experience with C372 is different than you guys'. Another note is I have two separate sets for my speaker and headphone setup, but my Senn sounds way, way better with DV332, although other components are of inferior quality than those connected to my C372 (Rotel RCD-06 -VS- Arcam Diva73; Audioquest Columbia -VS- Colorado; and Supra Lorad -VS- Hovland).

Has anyone tried using his Senn or AKG or other difficult-to-drive- phones with C372 (or other model)?
post #40 of 191
Thread Starter 
I tested K701, Woodied SR-325i and K240 Sextett MP on the 712 and the C720BEE (which has the C320BEE amp).

@ Tim: Thats actually the 'different' principles I was talking about! The amp is made to amplify the signal the best way it can, and it's headphone out is just connected with some resistors to that very same signal. A CD-player is made to read CD's the best way it can, they put a (cheap) opamp there just so somebody could also listen to some headphones now and then, but they know people are not going to buy it for that.
post #41 of 191
I owned a NAD receiver, the 701 i think. I remember the HP out sounding especially good. Actually the whole thing was quite impressive for an entry level receiver. A bit on the dark side but lots of detail and great bass control.
post #42 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrTv View Post
Actually, the amp drives my AKG decently, but it's not as good with Senn 650

This is what I experienced when using C372 with the Senn:
- bloated bass
- lack of quality treble (roll off and lack of sparkle)
- a bit muddy mid.

When I first switched to a dedicated head-amp my dad made for studio monitoring, I found that, though it's cheap and wasn’t made with audiophile in mind, it drove my Senn somewhat better than C372 (better bass, a bit better treble).

However, things changed like night and day when I switched to DV332, especially when tubes upgrade taken into account.

I don’t know why my experience with C372 is different than you guys'.

Actually your experience isn't so different to mine. I had a NAD C320BEE and found the same slightly muddy mid and rolled off treble with my HD650. Very true sound with good timbre and definition, but just a little too thick. However, instead of going with a dedicated I bought a Marantz PM6010 and found just the sound I was looking for. It wasn't altogether a fluke, as I knew from long experience that Marantz amps generally have a more open sound with airier treble than NAD, and reviews of the 6010 in English Mags confirmed this. I should be clear that the NAD is a fine amp, but synergy is all, and buying two components with similar traits (i.e. rolled off treble, heavy bass) just doesn't work. I can imagine the NAD sounding great with an AKG 701 though.
post #43 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by vvanrij View Post
@wae5: Hmm, but I know the sound can be better, audible better, so if I spend money on something I want to 'upgrade', not to sidestep and say wow cool, it costs 300euro, looks very different, but sounds the same! Then I would rather save up and go for a real 'leap' if thats still possible at this level
Upgrading a SS amp can be a very tricky thing. Unlike tube amps which are valued for their euphonic coloration, solid state amps are valued for their sonic neutrality. So when you upgrade a good SS amp, it’s very challanging to hear the difference between two things that are striving for neutrality -in other words, it’s devilishly difficult to hear the minute absences and presences of anything. When I purchased the MKV I planned to couple it with the MKIV SE as its pre amp. I knew the Pany receiver is an excellent HP amp so when I compared the two, I was pleased to confirm this which cannot be a bad thing. As a matter of fact I liked the Pany so much, I bought two several years ago for the price of the MKV because they make excellent home theater receivers which was the way I entended to use them. Using one as an HP amp turned out to be a brilliant afterthought.
post #44 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by vvanrij View Post
But when AB'ing the LD to the NAD, I could actually hardly tell the difference, except that the 'balance' or 'richness' of the NAD seems a bit better, not sure how to describe it, it just sounds a bit more musical. The Denon's HPout sounds muddy, while the Rotel's HPout (on both) is clean, almost too clean, and introduces some hiss noise. I do have to put a big YMMV warning sign here, because I just LOVE the NAD sound, but as I said before, they actually sound very alike!
It would be a good test to try the Sylvania 5654's (black plate, halo getter) during your ABing. The 6CQ6's (EF92) come to mind also. They have a serious sound stage and that nice "Mullard" signature.
post #45 of 191
Gotcha. I still think there is a possibly erroneous assumption there, though. That being that it's a "cheap" op amp. Some of the best headphone circuits in sources, receivers and integrated amps, and some of the best dedicated headphone amps are built around op amps. There were two fallacies in the long-standing Head-fi beliefs about headphone jacks - one was that most of them were built around op amps, the other was that the op amps were the cheap option. I've actually found in the last couple of weeks that some of the most expensive integrated amps and receivers use op-amp based headphone sections. I don't think it matters much if you're using high impedance phones, but in at least a few high-end cases, I've found op amp sections built into components purposely and thoughtfully, to provide excellent performance, even with very low impedance phones.

Then there is the unusual experience I share with wae4. I own the same Panasonic digital receiver he does. Because it uses digital class D amps, you cannot resistor-down the headphone out, they had to build it around an op amp. It is not an expensive receiver, it is built mostly for AV surround and that headhone section was almost certainly an "afterthought" if there ever was one.

It sounds great.

Tim

Quote:
Originally Posted by vvanrij View Post
I tested K701, Woodied SR-325i and K240 Sextett MP on the 712 and the C720BEE (which has the C320BEE amp).

@ Tim: Thats actually the 'different' principles I was talking about! The amp is made to amplify the signal the best way it can, and it's headphone out is just connected with some resistors to that very same signal. A CD-player is made to read CD's the best way it can, they put a (cheap) opamp there just so somebody could also listen to some headphones now and then, but they know people are not going to buy it for that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphone Amps (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › NAD Receiver beats LD MKIVse??