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 6

post #76 of 191
7/16/08 at 11:45pm
You can use Deoxit on the switches. It's available at Radio Shack. You might want to take it to a repair shop and get an estimate. Search eBay for completed auctions to see if it's worth getting fixed. It may just need some caps replaced. It could also be blown chips which may not be easily fixed. The chips may be hard to find.
Reply

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #77 of 191
7/17/08 at 3:23am
Thread Starter 
3020's pop up on ebay regular, not too bad prices either.
Reply
post #78 of 191
7/17/08 at 9:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by scompton View Post
You can use Deoxit on the switches. It's available at Radio Shack. You might want to take it to a repair shop and get an estimate. Search eBay for completed auctions to see if it's worth getting fixed. It may just need some caps replaced. It could also be blown chips which may not be easily fixed. The chips may be hard to find.
What Scompton said. Take it to a good repairman. He'll clean all the pots and switches and replace any failing caps and it should be so close to "good as new" that you'll never hear the difference. I speak from direct experience. My old Harman Kardon (early 70s) was popping and crackling; no sound was coming from one channel; weak sound was coming from the other. $55 later it sounds great.

Tim
Reply
post #79 of 191
7/20/08 at 6:31pm
This thread made me listen more carefully to the built-in headphone amp of my Denon pre-amp.
And it sounds actually quite good. The bass is even better.
So much for the X-can.....
Reply
post #80 of 191
7/21/08 at 2:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiemen View Post
This thread made me listen more carefully to the built-in headphone amp of my Denon pre-amp.
And it sounds actually quite good. The bass is even better.
So much for the X-can.....

Hang on. Are you saying you think the Denon preamp is as good, or even better, than the X-Can v3? Let's hear more about this.

The Denon of course would have its own HP amp, possibly op amp based.
Reply
post #81 of 191
7/21/08 at 6:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pp312 View Post
Hang on. Are you saying you think the Denon preamp is as good, or even better, than the X-Can v3? Let's hear more about this.

The Denon of course would have its own HP amp, possibly op amp based.
The Denon PRA 1100 has a built-in headphone amp.
I didn't pay much attention to it, because I had the X-can.
This thread made me curious, and I started to listen to the Denon headphone out. Much to my surprise, I like it.
I can't say it's better or worse, just different. What is does better is the bass, it goes deeper. And the Denon is less bright, warmer. But the downside of warmer is a slightly loss of detail.
Maybe with better headphones and golden ears, there's more to say about sound difference. For the moment I'm pleased with the Denon headphone amp.
Reply
post #82 of 191
7/21/08 at 9:40am
I must say this thread and the others along similar lines has only confirmed for me what I more than suspected anyway: that the contemptuous dismissal of all non-dedicated HP amps and the determination to confine the definition of "headhone amp" to dedicateds only has no validity in the real world; that there are plenty of HP jacks on integrateds/receivers/pre-amps that will satisfy owners of quality phones long term without them ever considering a dedicated amp. Of course no one is suggesting present owners of dedicateds start rushing around trying sundry HP jacks in the hope of finding something better; it's still a reasonable bet that something designed for a specific job will do that job very well. The most I hoped for in this forum, and maybe it's been achieved already, is a little more receptiveness to the idea of non-dedicated amps being able to approach and often equal the sound of even quite pricey dedicateds.
Reply
post #83 of 191
7/21/08 at 9:57pm
IMO, if you find a HP out on your integrated amp or receiver that sounds good enough for you stop worrying about equipment and just enjoy the music. Throw in a couple of good cans instead if you want to spend money...
Reply
post #84 of 191
7/22/08 at 2:25am
I can personally vouch for the stellar sound out of the headphone jack of my NAD C352 driving an AKG K701.
Reply
post #85 of 191
7/22/08 at 4:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by nutric08 View Post
IMO, if you find a HP out on your integrated amp or receiver that sounds good enough for you stop worrying about equipment and just enjoy the music. Throw in a couple of good cans instead if you want to spend money...

I presume you're referring to headphones and not getting drunk.

As an encore, perhaps you could tell us how your LD MkIII compares to the jack on your 5001.
Reply
post #86 of 191
7/22/08 at 7:20am
Thread Starter 
Hmmmm.... we are on to something here hmm.
Reply
post #87 of 191
7/24/08 at 10:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headdie View Post
Well, I don't have a LD MK4SE to compare with my NAD, but the C720BEE is my best to drive D2000 (25ohms) and DT990 (600ohms). It doesn't seem sensitive to the headphone impedance... If there is such a thing...
Please, let me correct this statement. After better listening, the Nad 220 ohms headphone out doesn't sound best with the 25 ohms D2000 !

I'd like to lower the impedance of the NAD headphone out. I understand that I can lower it down to 68 ohms, simply by shorting to the ground R&L channels with two 100 ohms resistances. I'd probably do it on the headphone jacket, inside the cabinet.

Could you confirm that it's ok this way? Sorry again for the wrong information...
Reply
post #88 of 191
7/25/08 at 7:02am
I just spent a week listening exclusively to to a borrowed Glow Audio Amp One. Technically, it's an integrated, as it has speaker terminals, but it taps its headphone out directly off the output transformer, so it is implemented without compromise. After that week, yesterday I went back to my old Harman Kardon, then I went back and forth between the two a bit to confirm what I thought I was hearing.

Not much.

The HK has a bigger, more powerful bass. This is not surprising. It has a big bottom end compared to every other speaker amp I've had as well. The Glow has something going on in the mids, very subtle. It is hard to describe, but the best I can do is to say it has a presence there that seems to push the mids forward without sharpening them at all; a smoothness there that seems to polish and mellow the highs without losing any detail.

It is really nice, but it is also really subtle. Which means a 30-something Harmon Kardon integrated held its own against a modern tube headphone amp. That's pretty good. But I stil may have to have some tubes some day.

Tim
Reply
post #89 of 191
7/25/08 at 9:02am
"I still may have to have some tubes some day."

Only if you're reincarnated as a woman.
Reply
post #90 of 191
7/25/08 at 9:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pp312 View Post
"I still may have to have some tubes some day."

Only if you're reincarnated as a woman.
Oh we have tubes. Mine have been tied. It's an experience I'll never forget.

Tim
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphone Amps (full-size)

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › NAD Receiver beats LD MKIVse??