Eh NAD stuff is okay stuff. I agree it is in the implementation and some do better than others. Just like DAC's....and other amplifier topology. NAD is no Merrill and you can tell.
Played it in my house few weeks ago, was not impressed. It is clean and detailed, but coming from class-A it was just not the sound I would pay 4k for.
Please don’t misunderstand my comments- I am not saying that one should chose equipment based solely on measured performance. I agree, one must ultimately decide with one’s own ears. I am simply pointing out that specs, far from being useless, actually can add a great deal to making an intelligent choice that ultimately can lead to more subjective enjoyment.
Some will argue that certain measurements will indeed provide some indications on how something will sound- it has been shown by empirical studies that certain types of distortion is found to be pleasing to many, among other things. The success of amps with these types and patterns of distortion, typically certain types of tube amps, and ss amps that have been engineered to mimic these distortion profiles, are indeed successful in the marketplace. But so are others which take a different approach so while we can perhaps find certain sonic tendencies correlated to measurements, they are no guarantee of universal appeal.
It doesn’t make sense to chose solely on specs, nor solely on what we hear. It’s a thoughtful use of both that can be the most beneficial.
@kuribo- Entirely your right to disagree. Specs are far from meaningless and can indicate many things, but not necessarily how a component will ultimately sound. Some would define audio ignorance as choosing a component by the specs without regard for how it actually sounds in a specific system. Specs should certainly be considered but cannot definitively predict sonic performance, our ears and perception are the ultimate arbiters. Enjoy the music however it pleases you most!
I disagree. Specs can tell you if your amp has enough power for your speakers. They can tell you if your amp will handle the impedance of your speakers. Specs can tell you if the character of the sound will change with the changing impedance of your speakers. Specs can tell you if what you are hearing is signal or distortion. Specs can tell you how efficient your amp is and how much energy you are wasting if you leave it on. Maybe none of that matters to you and perhaps ignorance is bliss. To a great many it is all relevant information that can be used to improve the performance of an audio system as well as lead to more accurate and enjoyable listening experiences.
Specs and measurements can be interesting but ultimately unimportant. I listen to how a component sounds. How does it shine light on a performance. Consider visual perception. You have day light, incandescent, flourescent. Dappled light, shading etc. I listen to music because it's beautiful. It can come from a highly b resolving, or mid fi system. As long as it's interesting and shines light on the performance. Measurements are ultimately meaningless except as an exercise in engineering. But I'm not an engineer. I listen for the love of artistic creation and expression.
Conclusions
Overall, NAD's Masters Series M22 power amplifier acquitted itself with distinction. Despite its small size, it has all the wallop necessary for staggering volume levels, and, if necessary, can be bridged to meet even more outsize demands. At $3000, the M22 is more than fair value in view of its compact size, excellent build quality, a tolerance for driving difficult loads, and, most of all, its transparent sound. It is an outstanding amplifier in every way, and I could happily live with it.
Yet both modules measure the same. hmmm. Based my experience you will be in the same boat with the 23.
I think NAD has implementation issues, no matter the module.
I think I would look at the Benchmark amplifier.
I tried the M22 a few years ago... gave it about 2 weeks burn in, and still could not stay in the room with it. Worst sounding amp I’ve heard in a long time! (and I grew up on NAD) I wonder if the new M23 is much different?
I tried the M22 a few years ago... gave it about 2 weeks burn in, and still could not stay in the room with it. Worst sounding amp I've heard in a long time! (and I grew up on NAD) I wonder if the new M23 is much different?
I had the NAD M33, sold it because I changed to a much more sensitive 8 (from 4) ohm speakers and didn’t need the Dirac room correction. Got a used NAD 368 with the Blu OS module. Both are very neutral, don’t have a house sound, you’re getting music they way the recording engineer wants it to sound. Both extremely low distortion. But that doesn’t mean either are for you, just that it works for me. I fail to find any fault with the logic that first looking at measurements will eliminate some products that just won’t meet your needs and wants. If there was a place I could go and listen to most the integrateds in my price range, regardless of measurements I’d go in a heartbeat, but such a place does not exist. So I too rely on measurements and reviews (though with a jaded eye) to filter out those items that likely won’t work for me. Time is precious, especially once you hit the sixties you tend to look over your shoulder and appreciate it more than when young.
Love this forum, learn a lot and enjoyed the good spirited (!) bantering.
Tubes on buffer stages don’t amplify the signal, so to say tubes give class d a nice tuby sound by sticking these contraptions on class d modules is just marketing speak.
Benchmark is the Benchmark but I wish it had more power. I doubt anyone could tell the class G Benchmark from a well designed class D hypex or purifi.
There is no better, there is only different, when it comes to opinions of taste. Tubes sound better to you, great. They don't sound better to everyone, as proven by @djones51. Our preferences are determined by experience, learning, and the biases we form.
@djones51seems like a bit of a contradiction. You compare a tubed DAC in one post ? Just an observation. And yes the tube would make it sound better.
@kuriboI believe it is in the HT Review interview that Bruno said his goal was a more tube like sound and that was one of the reason people were moving from valves to his Purfi amplifiers. (me I do not hear it with any of the Purfi equipped units I have listened to, may get a VTV with a tube buffer and give it another try)
So valves are still the benchmark. Imitation is the best form of flattery no?
I like the Pharahos II sound but I love the sound of my X200 and my Octave V70 Class A.
No arguments just observation though they maybe subjective.
I don’t use a tube preamp with class D amps, kind of defeats the point of getting class D. I don’t want a damn tube in a DAC either. If you want tubes then buy tube amps.
My feeling too....But don't worry, from what I hear in another thread, in the future no one will be buying tubes because everyone will have decided that class d sounds better.
I don’t use a tube preamp with class D amps, kind of defeats the point of getting class D. I don’t want a damn tube in a DAC either. If you want tubes then buy tube amps.
Speaking for myself, it's all about what I hear. Usually, I already know the price. But not always. The "specs" doesn't really matter.
Many would agree with you about "specs" not mattering to them. Many others feel differently. Whatever works for you. Sadly, there are many small minded people who can't accept that their opinions on the matter are unimportant to a great many.
A manufacture that prints less than or poor specs is either brutally honest and or lacking marketing savvy.
Or maybe they believe all those who say "specs don't matter."
Also it is interesting that the majority of owners of separates utilizing Class D power amplification are using Tubed Preamplifiers like LTA, A-S, AR, SUPRATEK. Quick Silver, on and on.
How do you know that the majority of class d amp users using a preamp are using tubed preamplifiers? No doubt many do, without question, but I don’t see how you can make this claim. Lots of people like the kind of distortion put out by many types of tube amps/preamps and feel the need to add such. Others choose class d because of lack of such distortion and the last thing they want to do is add something they are trying to get away from.
So Mark is behind the success and makes Bruno’s module sound good.
That’s certainly one way to look at it. I tend to look at it differently.
The preamplifier is the actual heart and brains of the system.
Almost every manufacturer recognizes this as a fact (PS Audio is not a subscriber to this) McIntosh, Pass Labs, Lab 12, EMM, Raven Audio, AGD, NAD, Audio Hungary, LTA, Simaudio, A-S, Rogue, on and on.
Also it is interesting that the majority of owners of separates utilizing Class D power amplification are using Tubed Preamplifiers like LTA, A-S, AR, SUPRATEK. Quick Silver, on and on.
So Mark is behind the success and makes Bruno's module sound good.
Just saying and pointing this out.
Have a good evening.
Bruno designed the amp module which is the heart of the amplifier.
Only in the most superficial way...The spec wars of Japanese transistor amps were based on a false premise...The science and engineering has improved in the last 50 years. See:
"The other important trend in the 60’s was brought on by the usurpation of the role of the vacuum tube by the transistor. Japanese hifi firms hadn’t seen much success with their tube-based designs in the early 60’s.But with the advent of the transistor Pioneer, Yamaha, Sony, Sherwood, Kenwood, and Sansui, all entered the US market with products whose specifications far exceeded those of US-made tube-based components. Of course 20-20 hindsight shows that these specifications used THD or total harmonic distortion figures rather than breaking down the harmonic distortion into 1st, 2nd, 3d, and 4th order harmonics. If they had, audiophiles would have seen how the distortion characteristics of early transistors were much worse at higher odd-order harmonics than tubes. Many audiophiles switched from tube electronics to solid-state electronics and discovered that the sonic results weren’t a step up in quality or enjoyment."
People should really take a breath and refrain from fighting over hifi gizmos. There is enough strife out there to go around. Adults fighting over toys....do we really need that?
Now have a CODA CSiB integrated (Class A/B, first 12 watts in Class A)
I owned a CODA amp many years ago that did the same thing- class A for the first 10 watts or so, then class A/B. I ended up replacing it with a Spectron Musician II class d amp.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
