|
Bronze Member Username: BilldashillPost Number: 83 Registered: Dec-03 | Marantz Harman Kardon Pioneer Elite Onkyo Cambridge Audio |
|
Bronze Member Username: LandrovalPost Number: 95 Registered: Feb-04 | I would say from best to worst: Marantz OSE Cambridge Audio Marantz Pioneer Elite Harman Kardon Onkyo This is just my opinion and it depends a lot on speakers and other variables. What is your price range? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Gatt767Malta Post Number: 49 Registered: Feb-04 | If you like NAD sound, why wont you buy a NAD? |
|
Bronze Member Username: NewfiePost Number: 15 Registered: Mar-04 | I'm just taking a guess here but, maybe Jeff doesn't want a NAD product because of their recent QA track record. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Gatt767Malta Post Number: 50 Registered: Feb-04 | Viper, lets continue with the guessing, did Jeff obregon, went to a NAD dealer, and heard and auditioned a faulty NAD unit, or is he basing his conclusions on what he has read on this forum? What about the QA track record? Have quite a no. of NAD equipment within my setup and none of them have a Prob, all bought new out of the box at my home. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 822 Registered: Dec-03 | Viper, What evidence is there that NAD's QA track record is any different from that of other brands/manufacturers? This question has been discussed recently here on NAD - To be or not to be? started by My Rantz. |
|
Bronze Member Username: LandrovalPost Number: 99 Registered: Feb-04 | John A. You must be kidding me? Maybe the couple dozens of consumers whining about their NADs. For other manufacturers it's only few problems here and there. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 824 Registered: Dec-03 | landroval, No, not kidding. Just asking a question. Can you answer it? Please take a look at the thread linked above. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BilldashillPost Number: 85 Registered: Dec-03 | I didn't want to start another NAD debate on my thread guys. There are other thread where you can defend NAD or not defend NAD. Please keep this thread in line with my original question. It dosen't matter WHY I asked this question either. Thanks |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 826 Registered: Dec-03 | jeff, Why you ask a question might be of interest to anyone wondering whether it is worth spending the time trying to answer it. Robert's question is obvious, and will occur to anyone who takes an interest. I put in that link in order to avoid opening up that debate here, again. That remark is obtuse and ungrateful: I do believe all posters were intending to help you. |
|
Bronze Member Username: NewfiePost Number: 16 Registered: Mar-04 | John A. Here is a list of issues I personally have encountered with NAD products within the last month: -T752 with intermittent loss of left rear surround Channel. Sent for repair. Repair depot unable to resolve the problem. -T752 with frimware V1.06A. Several annoying quirks with this unit. -T753 with a high frquency hum only in the center and rear chanels in all surround modes including DD and DTS. -T753 with a ticking cooling fan. -T512 x 2 with intermittent loss of right channel during analogue playback. Swapped the cable into the left chennel on the DVD player right speaker now producing music. -T532 will not recognize enhanced CDs. Ejects them with "Disc Error" on the display. T513 read them fine? As you can tell I like NAD sound. I must if I was willing to spend more than a month returning their products in the hopes of finding a good batch. The average consumer would not have done this. So, I believe I have every right to question NAD's QA. These are all recent models. The same models that most people on this sitewith problems and queries seem to be having issues with. Jeff. I apologize for if I've turned your thread into this dicussion. It was not my intention. Robert's question seemed a little aggressive in suggesting NAD. Based on the experience I've had, I didn't want you to be pushed into a purchase. Rather, to have people with knowledge on the products you are researching share it with you. |
|
Unregistered guest | JA, The battle lines were famously drawn on another thread and should be confined there. Take a step back and chill out for a moment. Due protocol needs to be afforded to the thread author; the pointed comments addressed to the author have crossed the line of courtesy and topical relevance. jo, I also appologize for mashing up your thread. |
|
Unregistered guest | jo, Pardon me. This whole thing is out of control. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkHighlands Ranch, CO USA Post Number: 539 Registered: Dec-03 | jeff: I will attempt to honor your request. After auditioning just about every receiver I could find under $1500, I think I have a pretty good understanding of what is out there and what each brand typically sounds like. Marantz is the only receiver that sounds close to an NAD, IMO. If Marantz had the ability to drive 4 ohm speakers, I would have seriously considered getting one. One caveat, though--I am only speaking of Marantz AVRs here. Their stereo receivers and integrated amps are strictly junk, IMO. Just like almost every other brand, Marantz has sunk all of the good stuff in its AVRs and the stereo gear is very flat sounding, with absolutely no depth to the soundstage (this is in the USA, folks, as I understand they have a very fine integrated available in europe, but the one released here is really poor sounding). H/K and PE are very laid back sounding, which can be made to sound really good with the right speakers, but are harder to match with speakers than either NAD or Marantz. Denon and Yamaha are much brighter sounding, and also suffer from speaker matching problems, although from the opposite direction. However, I have not heard the Cambridge Audio--it was released after I bought my NAD T753 (which I love, BTW). I must admit that Cambridge is a very fine brand and if the receiver sounds like their integrateds, then it will tend to be more relaxed sounding than either the NAD or Marantz AVRs. When I considered getting a Cambridge integrated for my study, I was a bit put off by the Cambridge sound. It isn't bad--just not my taste, as I found it to be a bit slow and a bit too mellow. It is definitely worth an audition, however, as it is warm and detailed. I hope this is of some help--good luck! |
|
Anonymous | Hawk, Did you give the Cambridge a decent run-in? (or whatever the correct term is) I initially found the 540A to be slower than an NAD but after some extended use the amp was certainly faster than the NAD. I too found the Cambridge to be mellow and not as realistic sounding as the NAD but once used for a good while it was certainly good fun to listen to. |