In the past, I have owned several NAD recievers and a CD player. I have never had any trouble what so ever with any of these units. All of the components were going strong when the upgrade bug hit. |
Volume pot problems are most common complaint I've heard. This can be noise all the time or just when changing the volume level. Think I heard about one channel going dead also. |
I currently own a NAD 1700 preamp/tuner, as well as a NAD 7600 receiver ( a real brute), both of which are in excess of 10 years old, and have never had a lick of trouble with either. My kid sister has a NAD receiver and tape deck, about 20 years old, and aside from having to replace belts on the tape deck, has never had a complaint with either. My experience is that NAD quality is top-notch. |
I have owned an NAD 2600a and 2700THX amps since new (+10yrs) and I am really happy for the quality/sound for the dollar spent. I consider NAD Entry into high end products but not really true high end. If you compare NAD to the likes of mainstream kenwood, sony, pioneer etc. NAD is the ticket.
Until you get the upgrade bug like I have now that I have purchased Maggie 3.5s. Now I need all the power I can afford.
If your budget is firm and you can afford NAD seperates go for it you will be very happy until your mind and budget start to dream and drift.... |
I have owned NAD gear (all purchased new) for 15 or 16 years. I never had reliability problems, and, like Joman, I've never bought a new component to replace a broken NAD component. I wish most of the other audio gear I've had over the years was as reliable and as trouble-free.
NAD certainly doesn't get the same bragging rights as other gear (in some circles). I think that if NAD just charged a lot more for their products and maybe changed their cosmetics (which I find to be efficient and agreeable), then complaints about NAD "build quality" would diminish substantially.
My audio system, for the "foreseeable future", includes a NAD C370 integrated amplifier and a NAD C541i CD player. I've held on to my old NAD 3000 PE integrated amp for the very rare occasion when I want to hassle with vinyl (most of which I've copied to CDR). |
The positive comments are welcome news. My information came from a former dealer who is no longer selling the equipment, so it may not have been objective. Over the years, comments on NAD sound quality have been consistently very good. My need was for a receiver and I was not even considering the "Big Box" brands, even in their higher priced categories. Certainly, if I develop any trouble with the C740, it will certainly be reported here. Thanks for the comments. |
I owned NAD equipment in a second system for a while. I have a 20+ year old 3020 that is still going strong. I also had a 302 integrated amp that one channel went out in the first 6 months. It was repaired under warranty. The NAD 512 and 502 CD players have a BIG problem with their displays going out. It is an easy fix but shouldn't be happening. A friend of mine purchased a surround sound receiver and it didn't last long before a channel went out. I think NAD designs excellent equipment and some of the problems are where it is built. The quality control seems to be a little spotty.
I hate to say this but I believe Sony manufactures a more quality product even though their sonics aren't as good(ES models)I use a Sony ES receiver in my basic home theater system and it has functioned perfect for 2 years and is easy to use (DA5ES)
So basically, I think NAD is great for the money but spotty on the quality now. It seems to be you can buy one and it last and another and it want. So, do you feel lucky?!!! |
Jdh9,
I can't speak to the newer NAD stuff, but like the rest of the posters here, I've owned older NAD gear for nearly 15 years. My 3155 integrated still does duty every weekend when we watch movies. I'd not hesitate to buy NAD gear. |
I think quality has declined some over the years as production has shifted more into China (a very sorry state of affairs in all kinds of products, IMO). But I've had MUCH worse luck with Sony over the years, in all kinds of products. |
NAD is one of the all-time great buys in audioland, nice sound, great sound taking $$ into account, not tweaky, reliable. About the only complaint I've ever had with my NAD integrated is the remote isn't the most reliable, the buttons get sticky and unresponsive over time. The unit itself tho is rock solid, and mine is on pretty much 24/7. Perfect bedroom/home office/2nd system type gear, I use mine in home office and couldn't be happier. |
My C 740 is being used in a home office environment. It is interesting that the so-called executive or ministereo systems easily sell for $300. Fortunately, I had old Genesis I speakers in my old and unused category and, at least for now, that makes a good-sounding pairing. |
The biggest problems I have heard about over the years is the NAD CD players. Skipping, locking up, jams, and other transport issues the biggest complaints.
http://www.audioreview.com/CD,Players/NAD,C540/PRD_117008_1586crx.aspx
http://www.audioreview.com/CD,Players/NAD,C520/PRD_123781_1586crx.aspx |
All I have to say......
If you want build quality and reliability and price for performance: see BRYSTON
or in the NAD price range... see ROTEL
Bryston and Rotel will blow NAD away qualitywise.
Bryston used is a good deal. They have 20 year warranties on all of their components.
My 2C.
KF |
I've heard the same rumours Sugarbrie posted. Rumour was the transport had no transport screw. |
YES I HAVE ------- BEEN A HI FI NUT FOR YEARS
ALWAYS BEEN A USER OF NAD EQUIPMENT . PRE AMP & 2X 2200
POWER AMPS ( STILL GOING WELL AFTER 15+ YEARS ) CHANGED THE VOL POT IN THE PRE IN 2000 BEING THE ONLY PROBLEM WITH THE TUNER / TAPE / AMP SIDE OF THINGS ( BUT THEIR CD PLAYERS MAY SOUND GOOD BUT AFTER BUYING MY 4TH UNIT 2 YEARS AGO WHICH HAS NOW A TRANSPORT PROBLEM ,SAME AS THE LAST MODEL .AND 2 UNITS WITH DISPLAY & LAZER, I HAVE ONLY
WORD TOO SAY ( S*#T ) I HAVE PERCHASED MARANTZ DVD 4200
IT WORKS & IT MAKES MY TV COME TO LIFE TOO BOOT
SORRY NAD |
Unsound-The missing transport screw was in the 512 only and was in the earliest models.It was quickly taken care of. |
Rotel has actually had more recent reliablity issues than NAD...mostly pertaining to their 900 series intergrated amps...and my best local dealer...who carries Bryston,Bel Canto,etc...dropped Rotel in favor of the highly acclaimed NAD classic series intergrated amps...I would agree with the assessment that most of NADs reliability issues have been with their CD players...NADs bread n butter has always been its amps...and despite the military pea-green cosmetics...the sound is what is important....and its way better than it should be for the money... |
The problems I've had with NAD equipment deal with the CD player (521i) skipping occasionally. It happens about once a month on a unit that is only about 8 months old. Thanks, Sugarbrie, for the links that report similar issues.
Other than that, NEVER a problem (technical, that is). NAD seems like very reliable equipment. I have NAD equipment ranging from an ancient 6200 tape deck (only every had to clean it and change belts once) to the CD player and C370 integrated amp. They are champs.
My complaint about NAD, though, is that bass is inadequate, esp. with their lower end integrated amps and receivers. The C370 is pretty good, but my Plinius 8200 runs circles around it. The Plinius costs a lot more, so it damn well better out-perform the NAD!
That being said, NAD is much more affordable, and if cost is an issue (which it is for many of us), then I think NAD is a good option. |
A dealer told me that the big problem was a few years ago when NAD changed factories. Since that time, the dealer says that the problems have been solved. |
A dealer would say that. NAD seems to change factories frequently, or else use multiple ones (in different countries). That seems to be part of the problem, and my experience says it has been a recurring one. |
I bought an NAD receiver in about 1990 and kept it for about 7 years, even using the preamp section for the last two years when I got a new amp (a long story). The thing never gave me any trouble; I gave it to some friends when I got a new preamp, and they're still using it, trouble free. Has never needed any servicing. Maybe I just got lucky, but I think you're in for many years of hassle-free audio. Enjoy, Mark |
Nad sells alot of equipement...so I feel any "lemons" are grossly overexaggerated...but like I stated earlier...I would stick with their amps...as my dealer says..."these never come back".... |
I agree with Phasecorrect. NADs amps, however one might judge them sonically, are quality-wise, warhorses. My only complaint has been the skipping issue with the 521i cdp. |
I'll second the CD skipping issues. I've got a C540 that skips occasionally -- not related to bad CDs, the skips almost cannot be duplicated. Then again I only paid 160 bucks for it new (B-stock) so can't complain. Sonically I don't think it can be beat for the price.
BUT, these CDP issues are not limited to NAD; almost all the CDPs on audioreview with bad ratings are due to quality issues. (Sonys, older Rega Planets, etc etc ...)
Cpdunn, regarding the bass issue, I've got a C370 and a 3BST and I think the NAD has more bass :) Maybe just the associated equipment I guess. |
Ogs20,
Yes, the CD skipping has nothing to do with the CDs themselves. Just last night I was listening to a Stacey Kent CD that skipped. It had never done so before. When I reversed the CD to before the place it skipped, it then played fine. This happens about once a month, and with different CDs. It's definitely something going on in the player. At one time I thought it was static building up, but that's not the problem, particularly in light of other owner's comments.
As for the NAD C370 and bass issue, I never meant to imply (in my comments above or in my Review of the Plinius) that the NAD is somehow deficient. On the contrary. I think the NAD packs a wallop, and is underated/underappreciated. However, I simply feel that the Plinius' bass is better (and it damn well should be considering the price tag!).
I have both the Plinius and the NAD; the latter sits proudly as the centerpiece of System #2 (NAD, Tannoy).
cp |
A dealer in my area told me to consider Rotel over NAD because of just the kinds of problems listed above - and he doesn't sell either product.
I ended up buying some used Rotel stuff that I'm happy with so far. |
I like the NAD on the whole, but am going to make the switch soon. Probably to Arcam, but the decision is not final (plenty of time for you to steer me elsewhere!). |
Nad makes great, affordable, "starter" hi-end gear...what more can one say? If u can afford better...by all means...go for it...but you will have to spend 3x the cost to surpass the Classic line of intergrated amps...which basically brings u to the Bryston b-60... |
I agree with you Phasec.. I recommend NAD to everyone who is getting into mid- and high-fi. I just spent the morning comparing the 521i cdp with a high-end tube cdp (BAT). The BAT runs circles around the NAD, but it is one example (IMO) of the extra cost NOT being worth it. For the most part, the NAD can stand it's ground.
There are things I like a little better than NAD, some not. Some I can afford, most not! |
I have just recently become familiar with NAD products. I have a pair of SNELL Type A Model III speakers,(big suckers) and a host of other speakers (there everywhere including two sub-woofers) as well as seperate components i.e Carver, Phase Linear, Onkyo, and receivers such as Yamaha 5560, and an older Yamaha which still holds its own, An older Marantz receiver , three Technic 800X surround sound receivers(two units have yet to be opened.) I also have two complete Klipsch surround sound systems with the 400 watt amp contained in the sub-woofer. One system is still in the box waiting to be hooked up to one of my computers. I have been an audio phenatic since the age of 10
and 50 years later I'm still hooked and can't get enough of audio and video. Being new to the NAD products, I find the NAD 917 surround pre-amp and tuner perform well in both stereo and surround sound. The remote should definately be redesigned. Although the physical appearance does not conform to recent trends in design, it's what's inside that counts. I picked up a used NAD 3400 integrated amp yesterday and paid $329. The NAD 3400 has been archived at the NAD website. I think it's 85' vintage but in excellent condition. Did I pay too much for a +20 year old unit? I have spent most of the day comparing the sound quality of the 3400 with some of the other equipment I have. The 3400 is just so much smoother and cleaner than any equipment I currently have. The SNELL's never sounded so good, even when I bi-amped them with a $600 electronic crossover. The crossover was a mistake on my part. I eventually got $75 when I consigned it to the dealer I purchased it from. I have no quams about NAD quality and find the products I have purchased to perform beyound my expectations. I think I've arrived at a new plateau in my fixation for video and audio products. Just can't get enough. |
