Carver M1.5T amp VS. NAD 2600PE amp

Please see my post on your other thread. In short, maybe's something is wrong with the NAD, they'll have NO problem driving that load. As far as Carver goes, I used to sell it(along with Adcom & Sony). It was midway between Sony(worse) and Adcom(better, but nothing special) in sound quality(you can do MUCH better). The Sunfire stuff was passable. But if you're on the level of using Maggie 3.5's, do yourself a favor and forget about Carver, especially the one's you're looking at. Don't get me wrong, Carver is a step up from the mass-fi crap you see 99% of people with.

BOY I MUST ADMIT I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT NAD, BUT THE CARVER SURE GIVES YOU A LOT FOR YOUR MONEY. POWER,TRANSIENT RESPONSE AND LONG LIFE. I HAVE FOUR OF THEM AND THAT IS SINCE 1982.THEY RUN COOL FOR THE MOST PART AND ARE FAIRLY SIMPLE IN APPEARENCE AND DESIGN(MAGNETIC FIELD). A TECHNOLGY MORE THAN 20 YEARS OLD.....BUT ALSO A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH THE VIDEO AGE. MAGNETIC FIELDS INTERFERE WITH THE IMAGE GUNS IN TELEVISION AND THEREBY CAUSE RAINBOWS ON TV SCREENS WHEN PLACED TOO CLOSE TO THE "TUBE". HOWEVER WHEN BOB CARVER INVENTED THIS AWSOME POUND-FOR-POWER DYNAMO THE INDUSTRY WAS STILL USING "STEREOS" FOR RECORDS AND TAPES.INCIDENTLY THE "t" IN THE MODEL IS SUPPOSED TO STAND FOR "TRANSFER", A CHARACTERISTIC THAT GIVES THE AMPLIFER A CLOSER TO TUBE TYPE HARMONICS THAN SOLID STATE TRANSISTORS CAN DELIVER.SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON TESTS MIGHT BE IN ORDER,BUT MY MONEY IS ON CARVER!