NAD M23 Stereo Amplifier: Best Amp Ever Bench Tested?!?

Bruno designed the Rogue amplifiers? 

Thought Mark did, shoot better tell Mark.

Bruno designed the amp module which is the heart of the amplifier.

@twoleftears

The problem is that the acolytes of Amir and Gene listen with their eyes, not their ears.

That's a gross mischaracterization. They do objective reviews which are widely respected and appreciated.

Let’s be clear: it’s only a problem for those who either don’t find any value in measurements because they simply don’t understand them or don’t have the ability to understand that people are entitled to their own opinions. No need to insult those whose opinions differ.

@facten 

My apologies- what I meant to say was I have not heard the m23 in MY system. I heard it briefly at a friend's place. Sorry for the confusion. All the purifi and ncore amps I have heard and/or owned over the years have had a very similar character which as I said, wasn't a surprise.

The problem is that the acolytes of Amir and Gene listen with their eyes, not their ears.  But hey, there's no bad publicity, right?

@kuribo thyname asked you if you owned the M23, you replied "No, I have heard it but do not own it". Hence my question about your take on the sound. Why the change in response to "I haven't heard the NAD M23 "? Whether or not you have heard other purify amps isn't of interest, you are focused on the M23 bench test results and responded that you heard it.

Until they come out with better testing equipment. 

Wait ... I thought for all non-objectivists measurements don't care? 

@kuribo 

If you are serious about information on the M23

NAD M23 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

Wow this is some thread, but I thought I'd put my 2 cents in anyways on NAD and the Hypex/Purifi modules they license and fashion for their amps... I've had the M22 V2 and the C298 in my office system and the latter was the better amp for "air" in the mids and highs and the former really great for bass/slam/dynamics etc. Definitely not "junk" just good value for money. Now have a CODA CSiB integrated (Class A/B, first 12 watts in Class A) in that system and it is clearly the better amp for my tastes.

Point is this is what you did on another thread.

Bruno designed the Rogue amplifiers? 

Thought Mark did, shoot better tell Mark.

Daily driver for background music in my office. Sounds great because of Marks preamp section, and Marks implementation of Bruno’s modules.

Sad little man.

Look again SLICK!.

All the integrates and amps are your boys Hypex and Purfi

Curds are in your eyes.

Hey they have some 7 channel stuff. LOL

@soix

I don’t use one or the other to the complete exclusion of the other. Like I said, I have fundamental requirements that must be met before I can even consider what an amp sounds like- why would I listen to a 2 watt SET when I need 500 watts? Why would I want an amp with a load dependent frequency response? Why would I waste time listening to an amp that has audible distortion products?

As I said, no matter how you choose, you can’t listen to them all and may miss something. That’s something we all must live with. At least I know that those that have been vetted will indeed work with my system requirements and are thus viable candidates.

I don’t waste my time with other’s subjective opinion.  Sure, I might miss out on something but that is a possibility no matter if I filter by performance or by what other’s think.

It’s you who’ve completely missed the point.  Why use either measurements or subjective opinion to the complete exclusion of the other?  By your own admission here both objective and subjective measurements can be wrong in terms of your own personal tastes/preferences so why would you use only one as your primary funnel?  If they can both be wrong for your tastes, why not use both to help whittle down your options rather than using just one to identify your options?  Using both together you’d be less likely to “miss out on something” or likewise avoid maybe wasting time auditioning something that measures well but doesn’t seem to exhibit sonic qualities that meet with your tastes.  Initially use both together as indications rather than only one as an absolute is what I’m saying here.  Neither is infallible, but both can offer very useful information IME. 

Here you go D.B. 

WOW Look at it all.

Then go look at USAM.

Factory Refurbished Products — Safe and Sound HQ

hard to take this character seriously 

member since 2000

no system shown

nothing bought or sold on this site... nothing, nada, zero, zilch

look at the history of posts... draw your own conclusions

The NAD is not junk just mid-fi. I have had some fun little NAD amps. 

Many have tried and failed and some are just mediocre. 

A high-performance Class D amplifier contradicts every single item of audiophile superstition. Designing one is the ultimate test to see if you’ve got your head screwed on right.

D.B. I am sure he would be. 

Now get to work on that 6 channel amp, lets see your genius after kicking Ralph around. . 

Also the Rogue is a daily driver.

Critical listening is reserved for Class A  and A/B Integrated in my listening room.

@curtdr 

I'd bet the NAD is far from junk...  maybe it ain't to one's taste, but it ain't junk.

Of course it isn't. Like I said, consider the source.

@facten 

I haven't heard the NAD M23 but I have owned and heard other Putzey designed amps, UCD, Ncore, and Purifi over the years. I have found that Ncore and Purifi are very similar with more refinement in the higher frequencies with Purifi. Neither really has "a sound". They are very neutral, by design.

I don't have bat ears either... and I still like the sound of my 1986 Integra Tx-88 receiver, and love the sound of my little $600 Marantz nr1200 receiver, and ...

I'd bet the NAD is far from junk...  maybe it ain't to one's taste, but it ain't junk.

@soix

As much as audio is a science it’s also an art, and the art is how the equipment ultimately matches with our tastes and unique hearing abilities that IMO cannot all be measured but must be experienced.

I agree with that to a point, that is why I don’t do this:

Then, we’re also able to glean that if the vast majority of reviewers and customers say that something exhibits the sound qualities we’re looking for it’s also worth exploring

I don’t waste my time with other’s subjective opinion. See above.


Sure, I might miss out on something but that is a possibility no matter if I filter by performance or by what other’s think. The difference is performance is a factual metric that can be compared, ranked, etc. Other people’s opinions are usually all over the board and are never based on the amp in my system in my room. I find their value less than marginal.

Exactly!

So why did you post Gene’s review?

And why is there so much of this Purfi stuff that is discounted, refurbed and sold used? Especially the NAD stuff?

D.B. I really want to know.

Gee, if you don't like Putzey amps, why the Rogue?

Oh and to answer your stupid question I did not care for the Purfi amps nor the implementation by NAD, Nord and Apollo. 

One needs to consider the source, as it were, and discount accordingly.

@jerryg123 

Gee, if you don't like Putzey amps, why the Rogue?

We all screen/filter our purchases, be it by cost, class, power, etc. because we can’t listen to every product on the market. Objective performance is just one possible filter

Correct, but most of us use objective performance as only one filter among many rather than using it as THE ABSOLUTE first filter.  Then, we’re also able to glean that if the vast majority of reviewers and customers say that something exhibits the sound qualities we’re looking for it’s also worth exploring even if it might not ace everything on our spec sheet wishes.  It’s just not that black and white in audio despite how much you might like it to be because there are lots of gray areas and intangibles that measurements don’t capture but that your ears might, and you’re completely closing yourself to many promising products just because they don’t hit a number on your wishlist.  As much as audio is a science it’s also an art, and the art is how the equipment ultimately matches with our tastes and unique hearing abilities that IMO cannot all be measured but must be experienced.  If you close yourself off to options because of numbers you may very well miss the art, which can make all the difference.  To me, use numbers but not exclusively — that’s how I do it. 

@mapman 

It’s valid to listen to something and say you didn’t like what you heard but that alone does not make it “junk”.

One needs to consider the source, as it were, and discount accordingly.

Well I have had 3 and all stunk….junk.

Do have an old NAD 3020 that sounds good, not great use it at the fish camp at the Port. 

I’ve heard the m33 twice at the same dealer in very informal demos. First time was horrible. Something was off. Either not working right or That device has powerful digital processing capabilities that can be used or abused.

Second time……more like it! Sounded good much as expected.

Moral of the story: One sample of anything does not necessarily tell the story.

There is no way a popular amp from a established reputable company that measures that good does a bad job. Whether one likes the sound or not is a different story. Another amp I would like to hear.  Any amp has to be paired with the right speakers to deliver the goods.  What the “goods” are is a very personal thing.  
 

It’s valid to listen to something and say you didn’t like what you heard but that alone does not make it “junk”.    There are lots of fine wines and cigars that some people dislike immensely  

Hey @kuribo, D.B. You really have a great opportunity to show off your technical prowess and your electrical engineering expertise, by designing and building your own 6 channel amplifier. You can use your precious Bruno’s Purfi modules.

Bet you miss that old B&O system.

I am between amps at the moment, shopping for 6 channels for an active 3 way system. I have owned a lot of amps over the years.

@kuribo - Since you have heard the M23 what insights on its sound do you have, and how specifically does its sound coincide with the test results that you are impressed with?

I have an NAD C298 with NAD's Purify implementation and think it's great. I really can't tell it apart from my Luxman M900U, but as someone else posted: "I don't have bat ears" applies to me as well.

I have an NAD C298 with NAD's Purify implementation and think it's great. I really can't tell it apart from my Luxman M900U, but as someone else posted: "I don't have bat ears" applies to me as well.

@thyname 

I am between amps at the moment, shopping for 6 channels for an active 3 way system. I have owned a lot of amps over the years.

Ah. OK. What amp do you own?

@thyname

How does posting a video link mean he's my idol?  No, I have heard it but do not own it.

Review from Gene? 😂😂. Not for me. Sorry. It’s OK, we are all free to have our idols. Do you own the M23?

probably safe to say that NAD has moved on too in the last 20 years. It would sure seem so based on the review linked above.

Twice two different units.