[boodi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj_mocok To NAD owners, im just wondering, is there any amps / headphones that your NADs dont go well with in particular, or they will pretty much go with anything (fairly neutral) ? because they are expensive, and the last thing i want is spending big bucks and finding out that the rest of my rig dont go well with the NAD.

yeah.. it's a bad point this , if you don't have the chance of listening different setup / sources before buying , most of the time you'll have to do a blind plunge .
I hate this becuase 1000 read posts on head-fi can't compare on one 1'person experience .

I have the same problem too
I'm deciding between the nad c542 and the azur 640c and i really don't know how to do .





Any 640 owner missing some punch / bass/ rythm ?

 

[Robert Seletsky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Seletsky I suppose my principal problem with both Azurs, aside from individual operating quirks, is the amount of energy in the treble. Although they are great players, personal hearing anomalies made them both actually hurt my ears with certaiin repertoire in particular frequency areas. Frankly, if that had not been the case, the humming transformers, oversized remotes, occasional motors not shutting off would have meant nothing. Last year I tried an NAD 521i (very well played in); it didn't hurt my ears at any point but it was distinctly underwhelming musically. Does anyone know if the 521BEE, which I have only heard in passing, is superior in bass definition, midrange character (the 521i had no character there), transparency, and imaging, while retaining an easy-to-hear rolled-off top that won't zap my ears with HF energy when I least expect it? Thanks. RS

Now that people have replied to my previous posts, I wish someone would answer the above, originally posted yesterday (11 July). Knowing that the Azurs have just too much treble energy for my physical comfort, how's the NAD 521BEE compared to the unmemorable 521i of last year? Does it have better definition, spaciousness, image, while still rolled-off at the top? Or not? Thanks again.

RS

 

[bln]

I doubt many have heard these two NAD cd players together, but the BEE products, designed by a man named Bjorn Erik Edvardsen who made the famous NAD 3020 integrated amplifier, are highly praised today. (Check out AudioAsylum for the almost unanimously high opinions of the C320BEE integrated.) Although I'm very impressed with the performance of my C541i, especially for the low price I paid for it, I have heard that the 521BEE approaches it in performance. I don't believe I've heard much of anything about the 521i.

 

[Murdoch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boodi Any 640 owner missing some punch / bass/ rythm ?

I don't, but then again I do most of my listening with the AKG K240S. I find the bass to be very deep, but tight and controlled. I like it. I can definitely confirm that the player is a smidge on the bright side- but the highs are quite pristine.

FYI Audioadvisor is selling a demo 640C for $420: http://www.audioadvisor.com/store/pr...sku=DMCAMB640C

 

[rsaavedra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geise As for the mechanism noise, well, you sorta' have to be an audio freak to even care about it (as most people here are ) Besides, it's not like it happens during playback, only inbetween tracks (from my experiences).

In my case the clicking on the 640C happened during playback, a fast repetitive tsk tsk tsk tsk..., not just between tracks, and pretty loud, could hear it 7-8 feet away in a silent living room. I returned the Azur because of this. Also I think the treble wasn't too nice, was too similar in brightness to my stock Sony NS500V, which I sent for modding after comparing to the Azur. The Azur I tried didn't have any transformer hum as some have reported here though.

 

[Murdoch]

I'd also add that like oneeyedhobbit I have not experienced any of the mechanical problems with my 640c that have been described above. There is a little tracking sound between tracks, but its very quiet and exclusively happens between tracks.

 

[Robert Seletsky]

I bring this up again because I had extensive negative experiences with several CA Azurs, and finally got rid of them. Although I wasn't impressed by the earlier NAD C521i, I bought an NAD C521BEE new for a rather good price. This NAD revision, after play-in (it takes a while to reveal itself fully), extracts the genuine passion and drive of the performance from CDs, creating a really gripping musical experience for the listener, not unlike good live music. It has depth, clarity, sweetness, detail, amazing speed of response, accuracy of vocal and instrumental color and placement: in all, that rare, indefinable "musicality."

Unlike the competitors in this price range--well, somewhat more costly, the harsh, uneven Cambridge Audio Azurs that, in my experience, get *worse* and more grotesque as they play in, the NAD has no similar unnatural aggressiveness in the top or ugly, glinting metallic edges in the sound. Moreover, the NAD is built like a tank, the remote is fast, ergonomic, and instinctive--unlike the enormous, tendonitis-producing, slow-responding, overly narrow-focused nonsense from CA, and it has no stupid design flaws like CA's loudly humming transformers, motors that don't turn off when the power isn't shut down in the right sequence, the occasional blindingly bright power indicator, or CD-rattling slamming drawers. The NAD C521BEE just sounds and behaves *right.* After so many revisions of this design, it seems that NAD has found a sweet spot. One hopes they will now leave it alone.

The NAD C521BEE, at $239-299 (I paid $239) is cheaper than the dismal Azur 540C, and is preferable to the even more costly 640C. It's hard to imagine that the NAD C542i is a lot better .

Robert Seletsky