Well, I post with just a little trepidation! The demo went ahead but the outcome was close to being as unexpected as could be imagined in hi-fi terms.
In short, I didn’t get the NAD C 658. The search for a new amp setup was because I *thought* there was an issue with my current Rotel RA-1572 integrated with the bottom end disappearing when playing busy/dense music (and a couple of other more minor events). However... post follows mainly about the demo but there is a bit about comparing the SQ of the Rotel and the NAD C658.
I took the Rotel to the demo with the intention of showing the store the "problem" ((same store as original purchase). Except.... the "problem" didn’t reproduce with other speakers. I tried 3 amp setups: the Rotel on its own; the Rotel as a pre-amp with a NAD C 268 as a power amp and, finally, the full NAD combo (C 658 + C 268). With each set up, I tried different speakers. Imagine by full on surprise when each amp set up sounded broadly similar with every speaker. Of course, if the Rotel on its own had the "problem" identified, it would have sounded markedly different. That’s when the penny dropped that the problem was far more likely to be my current speakers. Slightly embarrassingly, a couple of people had asked whether that was the issue (crossover points etc). Blithely, I had cast it aside.... "No, no; it’s the amp" was my earnest and now obviously inaccurate reply. Sometimes, the Homer Simpson moment just hits home. Doh!
So, having gone in with real intent and fully expecting to walk out with a gleaming new NAD C 658, I did indeed indulge. In a pair of Monitor Audio Gold 100 G5 speakers :o) (is there a "scratch head" emoji?). In short, the "problem" with the Rotel doesn’t reproduce with either the MA Golds, nor the KEF R3s which I also demoed. I preferred the MAs because, to my ears, they were a fraction tamer than the KEFs although the latter may well work well with the NAD for the reasons below.
The NAD C 658 is obviously feature rich compared to the Rotel, so that’s a gimme. However, on the off chance it’s of interest to at least someone, here’s my take on the SQ comparison. On a same speaker basis, the audio characteristics of the amps are much more comparable than I expected. If anything, the Rotel offers marginally more detail and the lower frequencies are marginally rounder. Higher frequencies are very similar and I couldn’t detect and significant differences with mids. Drums and percussion have slightly more depth with the Rotel. In truth, if anyone had dropped in without knowing which equipment was being used, I think most would have been hard pressed to hear significant differences without an extended listen. Overall, the NAD is slightly more restrained (not to say it is restrained), hence it being arguable that the KEFs will not sound too "zingy" with the NAD.
In short, if I had specifically wanted streaming and/or room correction and didn’t already have an amp, I would *probably* have gone for the NAD. The NAD is a touch more expensive than the Rotel although, of course, the NAD will also need a power amp which will add to the overall cost. On purely SQ? I’ll sit on the fence and put it down to personal preference... :-) .
To those already with the NAD and those who eventually pull the "buy" trigger, good luck and happy listening.
