Keep hearing quality issues with NAD, though...
|
New member Username: Daniel_1Post Number: 2 Registered: Apr-06 | Visiting the NAD website and reading it, showing the systems of NAD received many quality awards. Any idea why there is a gap between the two - poeple who brought systems and have quality issues to awards NAD received on their products performance? Thanks, Daniel |
|
Bronze Member Username: Uback007Post Number: 50 Registered: Mar-06 | Here's a post that I wrote a week ago on the subject.. I'm sure the guy named "Hawk" on this board will concur (Art Kyle will not!...I love you Art!) "The NAD product line most likely has less faults in regards to reliablity than lets say big box brand such as Sony, Yamaha, Onkyo, etc. The difference is the owners of these big box products in relation to the owners of NAD, ROTEL, MARANTZ, etc. Let's face it, we're a different breed! We study, spend a sh*t-load of time talking about it, thinking about it, dreaming about it than a typical big box customer does... Think about it! We live and breath this stuff -ad nauseum! You ask the average customer shopping for a receiver at a Circuit City, Best Buy if he or she has ever heard of NAD, ROTEL, REGA, etc... They would look at you and say, "who?" They aren't the "audio geeks/weinees" we are...They don't spend countless hours on this forum, shooting the breeze with other like-minded folks. Therefore, when we hear about a problem with lets say, NAD receivers- we get to hear from everyone else that studied, reviewed, talked, auditioned, Auditioned, AUDITIONED their products before purchases, found this site and others and completely dove-in. And then, like clockwork, "NAD has a quality problem" This kind of talk spreads like wildfire, having a profound affect of our perception about a brand. In reality, however, the aforementioned big box brands probably have a lot more faulty units being shipped than NAD does - those folks just get it repaired and never even think about jumping on a site like this to tell the world of their misfortune. They are too busy drinking their great Kendall Jackson wine while listening to their prized BOSE wave music systems!" Just my .02 IMO....Don't be mad at me Kyle! |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2258 Registered: Dec-04 | Uback, I swear that is a cutandpaste of your last post. And his name is Art, spelled like it sounds. Problems with higher than regular products are reported here because some or the members have higher than regular kits. If you want regular big box shite, you might visit regular big box store forums. BTW, in my opinion, Nad has serious issues with their AVR's. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Uback007Post Number: 51 Registered: Mar-06 | Nuck, Did you not read what I wrote? I aknowledged it was from a post that I had written from last week. Hello!?! It's a called a "ribbing" to Art..it's not meant to be disrespectful. It's tongue and cheek. You know what that means. This board is a total lesson in human behaviour..quite amusing really. When someone writes something here, it is meant as their opinion..usually denoted as "IMO" or my ".02" I get the feeling that you and several others here bought some bad units from NAD..I'm sorry for your luck..I'd be upset too. What I would not do, however is spread this exagerated view point just because you are bitter about what happened to you. Be realistic. Stuff breaks.. What I said in my post above is that on this board, taking into consideration the nature of the high-end audio consumer mentality - it gets overly blown out of proportion. Just don't let your bad experience fuel a bigger disgain and "sour grapes" attitude that is not representational to what is really fact. I happen to have done a lot of research way outside of this board and learned that things are really not the way you and others portray them- not in a long shot. But I guess in your case Nuck this is "par for the course" You know I went into a very respected audio shop recently and the owner, someone that I have known awhile said that he never gets on the "opinion" boards because, as he says, its filled with a ton of people that get very very opinionated and sometimes, downright rude. When I got on here 2 weeks ago, I came to learn and get suggestions and advice. I was warned about your smartass attitude. After reading what you wrote above, I have learned personally that you really didn't even read the post at all. You were too busy, copping an attitude and being smart. Calm down, Nuck. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2263 Registered: Dec-04 | well Uback, why don't you go back to your dealer friend and confirm that, yes Nuck is a smartass, and yes, the Nad receivers still inflict an above average of customer complaints. That was not a typo, I said inflict. So far as my attitude is concerned, I could not care less as to your opinion. And should you try to tell me how to conduct myself, particularly as to my demeanor, I might direct a single digit. I do not spite or quarell without reason, however I may raise ire with a noob here, and I do not care if you are an engineer or trash collector. I may post for pleasure, for jest or for import, however I do not take ant post for nothing. Having never having a post edited, I might suggest that such an elouquent member as yourself taking the time to respond to my elfish post is most flattering indeed, and I look forward to the following. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3135 Registered: Feb-05 | UB did I respond to that original post. I think I did but can't remember for the life of me. Thanks Nuck for standing up but I think that UB was just funnin' ma and I'm ok with that. As you know Nuck this can be a fun place to hang out we all will have some disagreements. I'm kind of burned out on NAD products and UB ain't, that's ok. I like NAD 2 channel gear but know too much about their AVR's to ever recommend them again. Frankly with all that can go wrong with AVR's it's a wonder any of them work...lol! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3136 Registered: Feb-05 | BTW today I heard the most fabulous HT ever. Theta Casablanca + Aerial Model 9's = bliss. |
|
Gold Member Username: Project6Post Number: 7587 Registered: Dec-03 | Nuck, Coby does not know you well enough as of yet, does he?  I remember a thread about subtleness...lol |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2269 Registered: Dec-04 | Even if, even if you don't love me... |
|
Bronze Member Username: Uback007Post Number: 52 Registered: Mar-06 | ok. I admit, I was a bit harsh... I am dealing with major hay fever here today and could scratch my eyes out they itch so bad... Nuck, Art, Bueller, Gang, I apologize for my words... I still like the sound of NAD though.. :-) hehehehe |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2270 Registered: Dec-04 | I knew the Eagles would help, hehe. Uback it's cool , I be a little ou t of form meself. Nad is sweet sounding when at their best, no doubt. I just prefer Rotel. |
|
Gold Member Username: Project6Post Number: 7590 Registered: Dec-03 | Yup...the sound of NAD was never an issue.  |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkHighlands Ranch, CO USA Post Number: 841 Registered: Dec-03 | Daniel: You keep hearing about quality issues because of people like Nucko who consistently leave posts alleging problems of which he has no first hand knowledge. Nevertheless, you ask a fair question and I think I can give you a complete answer. First, NAD was founded over 30 years ago, and it was the first of what we now call a "virtual" manufacturer. It was a pretty novel concept then, but very common now (used by Rotel, Cambridge, Arcam, etc.). NAD was designed in Britain and contracted out the manufacturing to Proton in Taiwan. This was in contrast to the Japanese keiretsu (sp?) model of total integration of the manufacturing that everyone else used. It was like the old GM and Ford being challenged by a young German company called Volkswagen in the 1960s. I am sure you have seen references to the NAD 3020, which was a 20 wpc integrated amp (with 3 db of dynamic headroom) that launched NAD and sold for under $200.00 30 years ago--it is truly a legend today. The sound was compared to amps selling for over $1000 then--pretty heady atmosphere. NAD took an entirely different approach to designing amps. They eschewed the solid aluminum volume knob and the expensive aluminum faceplate to put in a much better power supply and high quality output transistors. Cosmetically, it looked pretty pedestrian, but oh my, was the sound ever something to behold! Nevertheless, despite the fact that it was a great bargain at that price, Proton's QC left something to be desired. That didn't deter most audiophiles, however, as the unit could be fixed and there was nothing that sounded this good for less than four times the price. When the next generation came out, they really had a lot of returns and the new 3040, a 40 wpc integrated, was the culprit. Big players like Yamaha and Pioneer responded by training their dealers that you could tell how cheaply made NAD was because of how cheap they looked (I know, I attended one of these sessions). I remember speaking directly with a japanese man who was a Yamaha facory rep sometime in 1979 or 1980--he couldn't understand why anyone could buy the NAD because it looked so cheap to him (nevermind the sound--it all sounds alike according to him!). For NAD, the cheap outside was a point of pride, as they liked to point out the money was spent on the inside where it counted. Still, something had to be done, so NAD then contracted with Toshiba for its next generation. Toshiba wasn't doing very well in the world-wide market with their audio products and Toshiba had a lot of excess capacity. Things clicked and today, Toshiba made integrateds (like the 3050) are remembered almost as fondly as the 3020. But by the early 1990s, Toshiba turned that excess capacity over to making laptop computers under their own brand, and NAD went to mainland China in search of manufacturing. They went through a number of makers, some were very good and others were not so good, depending upon the factory. This became a point where other brands suggested that NAD was no good as it was made in China, the land of cheap goods, whereas their product was being made in Japan, "the land of perfection in all things." I heard this so many times from a Denon factory rep that it made me ill. This counter-marketing is remenicent of the counter-marketing Budweiser used against Corona beer about 10-12 years ago, alleging urine was put into Corona's beer (Corona sued Bud and won a very large judgement for unjust commercial disparagement). This charge that China only made cheap goods is truly ironic in light of later events. The 1990s was a tough decade for NAD. They went through a series of corporate owners as the original NAD was sold several times, usually ending up as part of a large corporate conglomerate that didn't know how to market their products. If you ever heard about when Harley-Davidson was owned by AMF (yeah, the bowling people!), you will understand what was going on. Well, about 3 1/2 years ago, NAD was acquired by the Lenbrook Group, a Canadian audio holding company (ever hear of PSB speakers?). Lenbrook brought back a lot of the guys who got NAD going originally, such as Bjorn Erik Edvardsen, the original designer of the legendary 3020, and he has designed a whole new group of products, such as the C320bee integrated and the C521bee CD player ("bee" are his initials) and they have been doing very well. These products have been in great demand, and they have been getting very high marks from reviewers in the audio mags, both here and abroad. In sum, this history lesson is offered to show there have been periods where NAD products have been less than stellar and that gives some basis for the charges of reliability issues, but I think that has obviously changed under the Lenbrook ownership. Lenbrook has brought some real stability to the company b/c they understand the audio business and understand NAD's place in the industry (NAD will never be a mass market brand like Yamaha). I will also tell you that I know for a fact that the NAD AVRs are made in the same Chinese factory and on the same assembly lines that makes the Arcam receivers, Yet the rumormongers (Nuck?) never seem to find any fault with Arcam--probably because the Arcam has that really nice faceplate that says "expensive." Clearly, if the NAD has qc problems, then the Arcam should, too--after all, it is the same qc inspectors and they use many of the very same parts, and are assmebled by the same people. Yet, some on this board speak of Arcam as if it were something holy. Finally, Nuck charges that we need to go down to our local NAD dealer to find out that NAD "inflict[s] an above average of consumer complaints." (Geez, that's not even grammtically correct, much less factually correct). Two years ago, before I bought my NAD receiver, I checked with four NAD dealers that I know and trust (who also carried other brands such as Yamaha, Rotel, Cambridge, Integra, PIoneer Elite, and MacIntosh) , and the answer was always the same--NAD was no worse and in many cases, better than the other brands of receivers they carry. When I did have to take my NAD AVR in to be serviced recently, I got a look at my dealer's service log containing all units brought in for repairs. Since the beginning of the year, they only had three NAD's needing service (including mine) and they had five times as many Yamahas. The dealer confirmed that was a pretty typical distribution. As one dealer told me, "If we had as many problems with NADs that were alleged by the competition, we would have dropped the brand a long time ago. But we like it." So empirically, Nuck's assertions are untrue. Today, almost everyone has their goods made in China (truly incredible what a managed currency kept artificially low by the govt., can do for the Chinese manfacturing sector). About four years ago, I bought a Denon 3803 when it was first released--imagine my shock when I saw "Made In China" on the siede of the box! Today, it's all made in China, yet some people simply won't let it go. They don't realize China has more ISO 9001 certified factories that the rest of the world combined. It was only about a year ago there were three guys on this board attacking NAD because it was made in China ("my receiver is better because its made in Japan"), so I had to take them on and point out the fallacy of their charges. NAD continues to thrive because the sound of the amps is as good as anyone else, and in many cases is simply better, especially below $1K. Usually, the sound of NADs are compared to good seperates, not other receivers. NAD is what is known as a "high value brand" in the marketing world. Finally, Nuck fails to remember I also own a Rotel, which I got after the original owner returned it because one channel was DOA. I got it at a greatly reduced price because it was a factory serviced unit, but that does not mean I think Rotel is a bad brand, nor should anyone else. Simply put, no brand is perfect, and every brand has a certain number of units with problems--how else could Denon keep 9 different internet retailers fully stocked with factory serviced units for resale? Now that is a lot of returns! |
|
Bronze Member Username: Uback007Post Number: 53 Registered: Mar-06 | yeah! Hawk, btw, I auditioned the Cambridge 640a v2 stuff and was pretty impressed. However, I still like the NAD stuff better...Did you see that they have another BEE model out? It's called the C325BEE check it out at http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_amplifiers/C325BEE_framset.htm I have no idea when it ships though. The press release was dated 4/4 on the site. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3139 Registered: Feb-05 | The fact (not rumor) is that the recent generation of NAD AVR's has seen alot of trouble. It's no shame to admit that a product line was problematic. I loved the sound of my Rotel RSX965 but it had more problems than you can imagine. Hum, cold solder joints, display issues. you name it the ole 965 experienced it. Yet when it was right it was really right. I didn't have any problem with my NAD T763's HT performance but it was the inherent hum for music that was problematic. I bought it for multichannel SACD to work with my NAD C162 and Hafler 9505 but the hum and hiss was too much. Both of the NAD dealers I work with stated that despite many attempts on the part of NAD to fix the problem it persists in most units. Some folks can hear it and it gets in the way of the music others don't pay it any mind. I decided that I could not live with that. When someone is looking for a piece of gear that is musical I have a lot of trouble recommending such a noisy product as the NAD AVR's. BTW the Rotel's also hum just not as audibly. Cambridge had so many QC issues that my local dealer quit carrying their AVR's. The lesson here is that an AVR will represent a compromise for music. Everyone who is buying one with music as their primary reason should be made aware of it. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2275 Registered: Dec-04 | Linda Smythe at Lenbrook is my personal contact, mostly for Psb support(excellent).She is a bit mum on the Nad. Lenbrook bought Nad for a song, as the company was and still is paying a large price for sub-standard AVR's(well below Nad standards were). Good post, Hawk, and thanks for the history. As you were in the shop for your 2 yr old unit to be repaired/replaced, a fly on the wall view of repairs showed Yamaha units en masse.Shock! As I do not have your extensive listening experience, Hawk, and I never have to visit the repair center to visit my componants, I may have to reference what I read, as opposed to you, who must see everything in real time. It must be a real joy for you to be able to visit so many people in so many places and placate their gripes about Nad. Yes Nad has issues. Yes others do as well. However, I do not see your point about my reading being the only point of view that I can offer. Do you see my point? Sure, I hear stuff at the dealerships all the time, but that does not equate to an ownership experience, over years. Right? If you have owned and enjoyed Nad for a long time, why did you trade? Or do you have a bunker of Nad? Honest Q's, and I do not mind being whacked at anytime. With respect, Nuck |
|
Silver Member Username: JohnnyMissouri Post Number: 567 Registered: Dec-03 | Hawk, Good to see you back!! I quit posting on here regularly because I got sick of having to say the same exact thing over and over again about NAD products. My findings are similar to yours, but not weighted with as much history. I am sure that we have some common sources (Ed at Kiefs?). Apparently, things havent changed any since the same arguments from years ago seem to be still going. Anyway, it is good to see that you are doing well, and I look forward to reading more from you. Ah, to be back in the good old days. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Uback007Post Number: 67 Registered: Mar-06 | I feel the same way about NAD...made the decision to go with the T743 :-) |
|
Silver Member Username: JonmoonPost Number: 231 Registered: Dec-03 | I too am sick of the second/third hand stories bashing NAD equipment. I own NAD T763 for Ht, C372 for Stereo, and the C320BEE for Turntable. They all work great and sound great. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2331 Registered: Dec-04 | Enjoy the music. |
|
New member Username: DakaaldaIL Post Number: 2 Registered: Apr-06 | I have been around audio for over 35 years. Owned Mac, Audio Research, Crown, Marantz 7c, 8b, vintage HK, Magnaplanars, Dahlquist etc. I sold these brands, was mfr's rep and later owned a store for 10 years. I listen to music today thru Monitor Audio and my AV system is NAD t163, 925 THX and a Denon 2900 playing thru Monitor Audio Silver Speakers and a Sunfire sub. It sounds and works very well. I have owned NAD and sold NAD. My son even has a 3020. I have a good friend who has a store and sells NAD. Lots of it. He swears by it and not at it. I can tell you that manufacturers go thru periods where they have problems. The trick is to fix them and not take advantage of the customer. NAD does that. I will probably buy Master Series for my AV as soon as the industry sorts out HD DVD, Blu ray, HDMI 1.3 etc. NAD sounds better than just about anything out there for the money and they are on a roll right now. |
|
Gold Member Username: Project6Post Number: 7749 Registered: Dec-03 | Indeed, enjoy the music! Sounds good they do...but I doubt they are on a roll, more like a toasted sesame seed bun |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1343 Registered: Sep-04 | Nuck, I'm a dealer. NAD AVRs were about as reliable as anything else from Denon, Pioneer, etc. They just didn't sell particularly well, so we dropped them. Regards, Frank. |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics