NAD C320BEE Amp

[pbirkett]

I can vouch at least for the headphone sockets of NAD amps. Although I use Rotel I've heard NAD extensively using the headphone socket and it seems pretty good, probably similar to my Rotel (although I think Rotel is better, but IMO Rotel is a better amp full stop). I cannot find all that much to seperate the Rotel from the Rega Ear.

 

[Wodgy]

The headphone sockets of NAD amps are only really good at driving high impedance headphones.

The C320BEE works well with Sennheisers in particular because those headphones are dark enough to hide the amp's inherent harshness.

Even with burn in, the C320BEE retains a very distinctive glassy edge as well as a clear deficiency in bass. (Higher end NAD amps are still a little glassy, but much less so, and the bass problems do dissapear.) The C320BEE is a nightmare when paired with speakers that have metal dome tweeters, especially in an acoustically "live" room.

The days when NAD amps were a good value are pretty much long gone. Unless you're buying used off of eBay, you can purchase a more musical amplifier for less money from other vendors these days. IMHO the C372 is still worth considering, however.

 

[Asmo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wodgy The headphone sockets of NAD amps are only really good at driving high impedance headphones. The C320BEE works well with Sennheisers in particular because those headphones are dark enough to hide the amp's inherent harshness. Even with burn in, the C320BEE retains a very distinctive glassy edge as well as a clear deficiency in bass. (Higher end NAD amps are still a little glassy, but much less so, and the bass problems do dissapear.) The C320BEE is a nightmare when paired with speakers that have metal dome tweeters, especially in an acoustically "live" room. The days when NAD amps were a good value are pretty much long gone. Unless you're buying used off of eBay, you can purchase a more musical amplifier for less money from other vendors these days. IMHO the C372 is still worth considering, however.

That's a interesting read, I was considering the C372 this spring, when I plan to upgrade my speakers as well. I still have not heard of a lot of negative feedback about nad amps at all on any forum, are your opinions mostly from experience? Do you know any good hi-fi forums with info? I regularily read, audio asylum, audio-review, AVS Forums, Head-fi, home-theatre spot, I'm always looking for more places to get info and opinions.

 

[Wodgy]

I've owned both the NAD C350 and the C320BEE. I sold the C350 after getting a vintage Fisher 400, but that caught fire, so I got the C320BEE. I owned it for about two years. The C350 was clearly better on almost every level (smoothness, bass, power).

The amp sections of the C320BEE and C350 were pretty good. In general, NAD integrated amps have much better amp sections than preamp sections. (Wonder why you never see any stellar reviews for the C160 preamp on its own?) The C320BEE is unusual in that along with all the other NAD preamp deficiencies, this unit's preamp section has almost no bass. This wasn't true of the C350. If you use a different preamp with the C320BEE's amp section, the bass comes back.

If you're looking for an integrated amplifier, a digital amp like the Panasonic units that are popular on AudioAsylum is probably a better choice. If you're looking for separates, I'd get a tube preamp and buy a vintage NAD power amp off of eBay. The latter would make a very nice system.

 

[insomniac]

How does the C320BEE compare to the Cambridge Audio Azur 640A?

 

[MoodyDragon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wodgy The C320BEE is unusual in that along with all the other NAD preamp deficiencies, this unit's preamp section has almost no bass. This wasn't true of the C350.

Not sure why people consider there being no bass in this amp but in any case there is a (defeatable) tone control for treble and bass for those who want more (or less). I believe the tone controls only change the extreme ends of the frequency band and leave the mid areas untouched.

Another tweak potential of the NAD is that the pre and power sections are joined by external pins... change the pins (cardas makes good ones) or put an interconnect in place of the pins... and the sound changes! Oh, also, this is an amp you do not want to shut off... the sound gets much better once warmed up.

Of course, a tube pre and an vintage NAD power amp would be divine! The problem being there are very few cheap and good tube preamps out there. Would like to know a cheap one which is also very good.....suggestions are welcome!

 

[Asmo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoodyDragon Another tweak potential of the NAD is that the pre and power sections are joined by external pins... change the pins (cardas makes good ones) or put an interconnect in place of the pins... and the sound changes! Oh, also, this is an amp you do not want to shut off... the sound gets much better once warmed up.

Yes, I changed the pins with Tara Labs RSC Link jumpers, improved the sound definetly.

 

[dd3mon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoodyDragon Not sure why people consider there being no bass in this amp but in any case there is a (defeatable) tone control for treble and bass for those who want more (or less). I believe the tone controls only change the extreme ends of the frequency band and leave the mid areas untouched. Another tweak potential of the NAD is that the pre and power sections are joined by external pins... change the pins (cardas makes good ones) or put an interconnect in place of the pins... and the sound changes! Oh, also, this is an amp you do not want to shut off... the sound gets much better once warmed up.

The tone controls affect the sound quality (with tone controls defeated, the sound was clearer and tighter). If you tweaked the bass to get it up to reasonable levels, it became fuzzy, uncontrolled and a bit boomy. My Panasonic never gets boomy and with the bass flat and it puts out ALOT more bass than the NAD ever did.

I tried these tricks also. I used different preamps (and a source with a volume control bypassing a preamp completely) and there was a large difference! This unit sounds way better when you bypass it's preamp section, however it's still not that great IMO. The jumpers are a very small weak spot IMO, I replaced them with top quality interconnects and it helped a little, but I believe the weak spots in the preamp cannot be overcome with a cable change.

I also left my unit on for just about the entire 6 months that I owned it. Not saying this is a bad product, but I do fully agree with Wodgy's conclusions. For bass heavy speakers with a rolled off treble this would be the perfect foil (because although the NAD's bass is weak, with tone controls defeated it is very tight). My PSB Image 2B's with small-ish, accurate woofers and metal-dome tweeters were simply a poor match for the NAD (despite previous generation NAD and PSB products which have been said to go very well together).

-dd3mon