Receiver

The YBA is the YA-201, the YC is the matching CDP

I also still use an Onkyo A-9555 with my computer, and believe it is still a great buy.

Depends on budget and do you need a receiver as opposed to an integrated amp? My current preferences are Portal Panache, Naim Nait 5i-2, Primare I21, YBA YC201, all under $900. I either own or have owned all of those. I like to use with a vintage tuner.

What would you suggest as a receiver replacement? Thanks

I would sell all three, then many good options depending on budget. The older gear loses much as the caps dry out and other parts wear out.

Thanks to all. I guess, ultimately, my concern was whether or not the NAD would the power to drive my speakers since HK has a higher WPC. I also have a mint NAD 7240 pe I bought decades ago, pre children.

I'll have to take an afternoon hook up the various receivers and listen.
Good advise on the capacitors, I wouldn't have thought of that. My greatest concern had been power to "open up" my speakers.

Thanks. rh

The NADs mentioned do have pre-out jacks, so they should have active preamps (they were designed so you could upgrade your amplifier to one of NAD's amplifiers, like the 2200 I used. I owned a 7240, and it was a very nice receiver. Much more dynamic than its 40 watt rating would lead you to believe; same with the 7175's 75 watts. Lynne's caution about the caps in the receiver is a good one as well. Ultimately, I'd suggest, as Yogiboy and others have, that you try it in your system. But give it a bit of time, at least a couple of days, to warm up and break back in.

You said you have two NAD receivers,I don't understand why you just don't swap the receivers and see which one you like better! Am I missing something about your question?

I can relate growing up in MN. So far, I can't find out if your NAD's have active preamps. Your hk3470 has pre out which means it has an active preamp. Generally receivers and integrateds have passive preamps which causes them to sound somewhat dull compared to power amps and preamps for example. Assume that your NAD does have a passive pre--if I find out, I'll let you know. Then you are comparing it to a receiver with less dynamic power but with an active pre.

In addition, the early 80's are close to shutdown, by which I mean that the capacitors are probably leaking and drying out and therefore the dynamic power that the NAD's once had will be diminished.

Just to help you understand what you are hearing when you compare. Have fun. Lynne

Thanks, Arnettpartners. You comments were helpful. I live in an area that only has one hi end dealer with limited product line. I realize much is trial and error. Your remarks help note what to look for in sound presentation etc. Thanks, much appreciated. rh

Agree. The NAD PE series of the early 80's had outstanding dynamic power and were considered audiophile quality. You might find them delivering more punch and thunder and excitement. Since they are quite agey at this point, you might find the hk more listenable in terms of lower distortion (no TIM after about 1995) and in terms of detail. Moreoever, the hk has respectible dynamic power as well. NAD is generally more acceptable in the audiophile community than hk. But of the current product I prefer the hk which is softer and has a fatter sound.

As a novice you need to hear quality sound so that you have a reference, but ultimately it doesn't matter what others think. You need to satify yourself and that might mean switching back and forth from one amp to another to appreciate the qualities of each. Or it might mean you prefer the dynamics over higher fidelity. You can always sell what you don't like on ebay.

You can continue to be a novice or do as Yogiboy says.

Since you have the NAD's just give them a try and see which ones sound better!