[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ymer I was pretty much decided to buy the NAD C320BEE but a friend of mine keeps on telling me

No offense, but your friend is an idiot

NAD makes great stuff. And at that price point, it's hard to beat NAD. There are only a few brands that are even competitive (some of which have been named here).

Quote:

Originally posted by TimSchirmer Also, proton is the same thing as NAD

Since when?

 

[pbirkett]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ymer I'm very interested in the Rotel now. Why is it harder to match than the NAD? It got full grade reviews from some british magazines.

The typical NAD sound is a "safe" sound, a little like Arcam and Sennheiser HD600, they will generally always sound alright no matter what you pair them with. Of course, you can get synergy out of them just the same. The Rotel is bright and forward, full of energy and life, and thus one may have to match them a bit more carefully.

Hifi Choice recommended the Rotel over the NAD and so did What Hifi...

 

[elnero]

There is also the new Cambridge Audio Azur 540A and 640A integrated amps. Might be worth checking out and it even looks like it has a headphone jack.

 

[Zoomie]

I just bought a Rotel power amp (RB1050) for my B&W 601s. I really like it. I know you are looking for integrated, but I went with separates after finding a used Parasound preamp on Audiogon for $170.

I agree with the others that suggested going out and listening to some different stuff though.

 

[soundboy]

What about some of the stereo receivers from Onkyo, Harman Kardon, or Denon? Anyone have experience with these?

 

[BlindTiger]

I don't know other members receivers but the one's I bought never had a torroidal transformer that you would get in an integrated amp or a dedicated amp.
Sure, the receiver was heavy but I think separates are the way to go. I've had Pioneer Elite, NAD, and old HK's (when made in Japan)

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by soundboy What about some of the stereo receivers from Onkyo, Harman Kardon, or Denon? Anyone have experience with these?

You're talking about a clear step down from NAD, Rotel, etc., IMO. Not bad, but not as good. You tend to get more "bells and whistles" but inferior sound and build.

 

[peter braun]

I am going to have to agree with the NAD recommendation. They make great products for their price range, and will provide many years of reliable usage. They really are a mid level hi-fi manufacter, so nobody should really expect Burmester results. They just supply solid performance that is still a marked step above anything in the mainstream marketplace.

 

[SunByrne]

NAD... not really quite hi-fi to the purist, but you can see it from there. Hey, NAD is kind of like the gateway drug into hi-fi...

OK, it's late, I should go to bed...

 

[soundboy]

I think companies like NAD, Cambridge Audio, Rotel, Arcam, etc....should all get a group hug from us "low (or no) budget audiophiles". I think it's hard to come up with an "audiophile-approved" product and still able to compete with the mainstream manufacturers on price. It's also easier to come up with a good design when a manufacturer can charge an arm and a leg for the product. It's a whole different story when the selling price of the product is relatively low; this was echoed in an ad by Boston Acoustics years ago.

So a thumbs-up from me to the above-mentioned companies.

 

[Ymer]

In the end, I'm probably buying a Rotel RA-01. They have an official Rotel representation in the very street I live, so I guess that's a good idea for guarantee and all.

Thanks to all who posted their opinions.

 

[TimSchirmer]

Yep, can't go wrong with the newer rotel gear.

I'm not saying NAD sucks by any means. I'm just not a huge fan of their newer lines, and at their retail price one could do quite a bit better.