The Nad is good for the pricepoint, but the K2 is in a different league, you will appreciate just how muddy the Nad sounds compare to the K2. Dynamics are much improved, and there will be a lot more detail.
Bert Puttocks:The Nad is good for the pricepoint, but the K2 is in a different league, you will appreciate just how muddy the Nad sounds compare to the K2. Dynamics are much improved, and there will be a lot more detail.
What about the bass of the Roksan, I read somewhere that it was a tiny bit lean and slightly mono-tonal?
What about the bass of the Roksan, I read somewhere that it was a tiny bit lean and slightly mono-tonal?
Bert Puttocks:The Nad is good for the pricepoint, but the K2 is in a different league, you will appreciate just how muddy the Nad sounds compare to the K2. Dynamics are much improved, and there will be a lot more detail.
?uddy is EXACTLY how it sounds in my ears !!! always with Epos m12.2 ... can you give us some more details comparing nad and K2.
although SteveR750 in another thread suggests i should try ANOTHER NAD, C355 .... hm... dunno http://community.whathifi.com/members/SteveR750.aspx
?uddy is EXACTLY how it sounds in my ears !!! always with Epos m12.2 ... can you give us some more details comparing nad and K2.
although SteveR750 in another thread suggests i should try ANOTHER NAD, C355 .... hm... dunno http://community.whathifi.com/members/SteveR750.aspx
Jax,
Did you manage to try the Spendors on their floor spikes ? If not, might be worth a try before anything else - I know you were worried about the kids bumping them but they are very stable, I have mine on a hardwood floor and a large cat who loves to jump on them and they are rock solid. Or maybe something like this is worth a try.
Did you manage to try the Spendors on their floor spikes ? If not, might be worth a try before anything else - I know you were worried about the kids bumping them but they are very stable, I have mine on a hardwood floor and a large cat who loves to jump on them and they are rock solid. Or maybe something like this is worth a try.
Neon K:The truth of the matter is, none of us wants to spend our own money and would much rather you did it, and tell us all about it.
LOL. I'm definately not wealthy enough to just spend for the heck of it. But I'm pretty fortunate and I can afford to experiment a little within reason (my wife being the reason)
LOL. I'm definately not wealthy enough to just spend for the heck of it. But I'm pretty fortunate and I can afford to experiment a little within reason (my wife being the reason)
matthewpiano:I'd recommend auditioning alternative speakers with the NAD kit. See how big the performance gap turns out to be and make a decision then based on whether you are convinced that the outlay will make upgrades worthwhile.
I'm experimenting in that direction as well. I'm going to get a loaner pair of MA RS6's for comparison.
I'm experimenting in that direction as well. I'm going to get a loaner pair of MA RS6's for comparison.
indietronic:
although SteveR750 in another thread suggests i should try ANOTHER NAD, C355 .... hm... dunno
If you don't like the NAD sound, switching models is pointless. The classic line of NAD amps are all very similar other than power output.
although SteveR750 in another thread suggests i should try ANOTHER NAD, C355 .... hm... dunno
If you don't like the NAD sound, switching models is pointless. The classic line of NAD amps are all very similar other than power output.
Spacehopper:
Did you manage to try the Spendors on their floor spikes ? If not, might be worth a try before anything else - I know you were worried about the kids bumping them but they are very stable, I have mine on a hardwood floor and a large cat who loves to jump on them and they are rock solid. Or maybe something like this is worth a try.
I hear ya. No I haven't put the spikes in yet. I will get around to it. Can't imagine it makes a big diff, but I'll give it go.
Regarding amps, if I switch, I will step up to something well respected and I will probably buy it used from audiogon. That way I can dump it for little expense if I don't like it. I can easily get a used plinius, primare, or krell. These are pretty commonly available used. Roksan and Cyrus are much less available in the USA. I really do like the NAD though...
Thanks for everyone's helpful comments. I appreciate the advice and it definately helps.
Did you manage to try the Spendors on their floor spikes ? If not, might be worth a try before anything else - I know you were worried about the kids bumping them but they are very stable, I have mine on a hardwood floor and a large cat who loves to jump on them and they are rock solid. Or maybe something like this is worth a try.
I hear ya. No I haven't put the spikes in yet. I will get around to it. Can't imagine it makes a big diff, but I'll give it go.
Regarding amps, if I switch, I will step up to something well respected and I will probably buy it used from audiogon. That way I can dump it for little expense if I don't like it. I can easily get a used plinius, primare, or krell. These are pretty commonly available used. Roksan and Cyrus are much less available in the USA. I really do like the NAD though...
Thanks for everyone's helpful comments. I appreciate the advice and it definately helps.
SteveR750
Well-known member
jaxwired:indietronic:
although SteveR750 in another thread suggests i should try ANOTHER NAD, C355 .... hm... dunno
If you don't like the NAD sound, switching models is pointless. The classic line of NAD amps are all very similar other than power output.
Even the 3100????
IME there is a world of difference between the 3130 and the 352, though I do accepst there is a NAD slam to both of them.
I dont know how the K2 can be described as lean - clearly only if one hadnt listened to a Nait 5i, the Cyrus 6 or anything from Rotel or Cambridge Audio. Maybe its easy to mistake control for lean-ness perhaps..? (if such a word exists)
although SteveR750 in another thread suggests i should try ANOTHER NAD, C355 .... hm... dunno
If you don't like the NAD sound, switching models is pointless. The classic line of NAD amps are all very similar other than power output.
Even the 3100????
IME there is a world of difference between the 3130 and the 352, though I do accepst there is a NAD slam to both of them.
I dont know how the K2 can be described as lean - clearly only if one hadnt listened to a Nait 5i, the Cyrus 6 or anything from Rotel or Cambridge Audio. Maybe its easy to mistake control for lean-ness perhaps..? (if such a word exists)
jaxwired : i think what i dont like is the sound of my (15 year old) 3100 , not the warm sound of nad in general, if what i mean by "muddy sound" is present in every single integrated made by Nad then i do not like it in general. but believe me i've started to think that maybe a combination like yours , 355 integrated + 545 cd player with epos m12.2 might give me the same warm sound i now have (already have chord cables) together with a TIGHTER bass (THIS is what i'm looking for) if you think the bass is extended big or whatever What Hi-Fi has considered to give 355 4 stars but at the same time is TIGHT and the amp is fast and rhythmic and of course you dont get boomy sound at all then i might have found a fine cheap solution to my problem...
for sure , at least that's what i see when opening the chassis of 3100 but also it is what i'm told from audio pro/engineers , old nads (early 90s like mine) had a robust construction and used better materials than current models by NAD do. maybe due to my poor experience with the nad amps (only have had 3100 for so many years) i havent listened to newer models and cannot tell the difference which may -as british or as a whole , sound has changed throughout the past few years- have led to a new sound . i dont know... one thing is construction/build quality , sound is another (electronics evolve, in a lightning fast speed, we all know)
so since you've got both 355+545 even with a different pair of speakers (i guess you know epos m12.2 character (good in jazz/fantastic female vocal for the price) you can accept or not what "what hi-fi: have written in their review , for 355 (boomy sound or what).. finally can you tell me a few things about the build quality and transport part (both mechanical and electronic, by what you can judge) of 545bee cd player. i love my marantzes all those years... never too late if nad deserves a second try, though..
SteveR750 encountered a huge sound difference when moving from an old nad to a newer... and this is very interesting...
jaxwired:indietronic:
although SteveR750 in another thread suggests i should try ANOTHER NAD, C355 .... hm... dunno
If you don't like the NAD sound, switching models is pointless. The classic line of NAD amps are all very similar other than power output.
for sure , at least that's what i see when opening the chassis of 3100 but also it is what i'm told from audio pro/engineers , old nads (early 90s like mine) had a robust construction and used better materials than current models by NAD do. maybe due to my poor experience with the nad amps (only have had 3100 for so many years) i havent listened to newer models and cannot tell the difference which may -as british or as a whole , sound has changed throughout the past few years- have led to a new sound . i dont know... one thing is construction/build quality , sound is another (electronics evolve, in a lightning fast speed, we all know)
so since you've got both 355+545 even with a different pair of speakers (i guess you know epos m12.2 character (good in jazz/fantastic female vocal for the price) you can accept or not what "what hi-fi: have written in their review , for 355 (boomy sound or what).. finally can you tell me a few things about the build quality and transport part (both mechanical and electronic, by what you can judge) of 545bee cd player. i love my marantzes all those years... never too late if nad deserves a second try, though..
SteveR750 encountered a huge sound difference when moving from an old nad to a newer... and this is very interesting...
jaxwired:indietronic:
although SteveR750 in another thread suggests i should try ANOTHER NAD, C355 .... hm... dunno
If you don't like the NAD sound, switching models is pointless. The classic line of NAD amps are all very similar other than power output.
indie,
Last time I heard a NAD 3100 was way too long ago for me to remember how it compares with current NADs. However, I will tell you that my 355 definately has a powerful solid bass output. This is something I really like about it. I also think the mids are very textured and rich.
Now, I could see someone saying that the bass produced by the 355 is not as tight and controlled as other amps. However, those other amps usually have significantly less bass. Many of them have anemic bass. The 355 bass is not sloppy or boomy in my opinion, but it's also not lightning fast. I really like the warm full sound the amp produces. Another thing is the amp has a very high damping factor. The damping factor is suppose to be indicative of the amps ability to produce fast bass and tight control of the speakers in general. Not sure if this is a big deal, but it's a good sign.
The 545 CD player is a very good partner for the amp because the two components compensate for each other. The 545 is agressive and has a strong attacking treble. It's not harsh but it is pretty detailed and punchy with treble. So with a detailed crisp sounding amp it would probably be way too much of a good thing. But combined with the 355 amp which is warm and full sounding the 545 has an excellent synergy.
Audition one if you can, but if you can swing it, just buy a used NAD on ebay. Then you can audition the thing for a long time and really decide. If you don't like it you can get back the bulk of your money.
Last time I heard a NAD 3100 was way too long ago for me to remember how it compares with current NADs. However, I will tell you that my 355 definately has a powerful solid bass output. This is something I really like about it. I also think the mids are very textured and rich.
Now, I could see someone saying that the bass produced by the 355 is not as tight and controlled as other amps. However, those other amps usually have significantly less bass. Many of them have anemic bass. The 355 bass is not sloppy or boomy in my opinion, but it's also not lightning fast. I really like the warm full sound the amp produces. Another thing is the amp has a very high damping factor. The damping factor is suppose to be indicative of the amps ability to produce fast bass and tight control of the speakers in general. Not sure if this is a big deal, but it's a good sign.
The 545 CD player is a very good partner for the amp because the two components compensate for each other. The 545 is agressive and has a strong attacking treble. It's not harsh but it is pretty detailed and punchy with treble. So with a detailed crisp sounding amp it would probably be way too much of a good thing. But combined with the 355 amp which is warm and full sounding the 545 has an excellent synergy.
Audition one if you can, but if you can swing it, just buy a used NAD on ebay. Then you can audition the thing for a long time and really decide. If you don't like it you can get back the bulk of your money.
thank you, jaxwired.
damping factor is a VERY important indication of the quality of hi-fi components but nowadays just a few companies (i can remember Musical Fidelity for example) include it in the specs of their machines (i.e. Kandy K2 damping factor is >110 (8Ohms)) so what is the damping factor of nad's 355 integrated ?
damping factor is a VERY important indication of the quality of hi-fi components but nowadays just a few companies (i can remember Musical Fidelity for example) include it in the specs of their machines (i.e. Kandy K2 damping factor is >110 (8Ohms)) so what is the damping factor of nad's 355 integrated ?
SteveR750
Well-known member
indietronic:
thank you, jaxwired.
damping factor is a VERY important indication of the quality of hi-fi components but nowadays just a few companies (i can remember Musical Fidelity for example) include it in the specs of their machines (i.e. Kandy K2 damping factor is >110 (8Ohms)) so what is the damping factor of nad's 355 integrated ?
Your ears are the best way to measiure the amp damping factor. It's so room dependant as well as air pressure / humidity etc its a meaningless lab measurement other than a very rough comparison of how an amp performs in a lab. If it helps, the K2 has a much tighter and extended bass than a 352. The latter is excellent for the price, but its not the last word in control.
thank you, jaxwired.
damping factor is a VERY important indication of the quality of hi-fi components but nowadays just a few companies (i can remember Musical Fidelity for example) include it in the specs of their machines (i.e. Kandy K2 damping factor is >110 (8Ohms)) so what is the damping factor of nad's 355 integrated ?
Your ears are the best way to measiure the amp damping factor. It's so room dependant as well as air pressure / humidity etc its a meaningless lab measurement other than a very rough comparison of how an amp performs in a lab. If it helps, the K2 has a much tighter and extended bass than a 352. The latter is excellent for the price, but its not the last word in control.
indietronic:
damping factor is a VERY important indication of the quality of hi-fi components but nowadays just a few companies (i can remember Musical Fidelity for example) include it in the specs of their machines (i.e. Kandy K2 damping factor is >110 (8Ohms)) so what is the damping factor of nad's 355 integrated ?
The NAD C355 has a damping factor > 160
damping factor is a VERY important indication of the quality of hi-fi components but nowadays just a few companies (i can remember Musical Fidelity for example) include it in the specs of their machines (i.e. Kandy K2 damping factor is >110 (8Ohms)) so what is the damping factor of nad's 355 integrated ?
The NAD C355 has a damping factor > 160
matthewpiano
Well-known member
Jaxwired - something which just crossed my mind....
What is it that you feel you are missing when you listen to the NAD/Dynaudio combination? Was the speaker upgrade just an itch that needed scratching or is there something particular you are trying to achieve?
It just seems you haven't had your NAD combo that long and you seem in danger of ending up in the endless swapping of components that I got caught up in. Is there something to be said for maintaining the status quo for a while longer?
What is it that you feel you are missing when you listen to the NAD/Dynaudio combination? Was the speaker upgrade just an itch that needed scratching or is there something particular you are trying to achieve?
It just seems you haven't had your NAD combo that long and you seem in danger of ending up in the endless swapping of components that I got caught up in. Is there something to be said for maintaining the status quo for a while longer?
matthewpiano:Jaxwired - something which just crossed my mind.... What is it that you feel you are missing when you listen to the NAD/Dynaudio combination? Was the speaker upgrade just an itch that needed scratching or is there something particular you are trying to achieve? It just seems you haven't had your NAD combo that long and you seem in danger of ending up in the endless swapping of components that I got caught up in. Is there something to be said for maintaining the status quo for a while longer?
You're definately making some good sense. It's easy to rush into things on a whim. BTW, I didn't upgrade from the dyns to the spendors. I went from B&W CM7's to the spendors. The dyns are a spare pair a buddy loaned me. He upgraded to excites. With the CM7's I made the classic mistake of not being satified with a 9 out of 10. To be honest, the spendors are better than the CM7's in a strict fidelity sense, but there's less system synergy.
You're definately making some good sense. It's easy to rush into things on a whim. BTW, I didn't upgrade from the dyns to the spendors. I went from B&W CM7's to the spendors. The dyns are a spare pair a buddy loaned me. He upgraded to excites. With the CM7's I made the classic mistake of not being satified with a 9 out of 10. To be honest, the spendors are better than the CM7's in a strict fidelity sense, but there's less system synergy.
Those Dyns love huge amounts of power to get the best from them. Dont judge them on the end of the NAD amp.
As already mentioned, I think you'll get the best all round result by getting better matched speakers to your current set-up and save a packet too.
As already mentioned, I think you'll get the best all round result by getting better matched speakers to your current set-up and save a packet too.
jaxwired:
matthewpiano:BTW jaxwired, am I correct in thinking you had a pair of Spendors? I notice you've now got Dyns in your sig. What made you change?
Yes, I'm dumping the spendors. Very quick, here's why...while they are the best I've heard with jazz, classical, and acoustic material, they are just too rolled off on low frequencies for popular music. This makes a lot of the pop music I listen to seem a touch harsh because of the anemic low frequency output. I think they are too neutral. Anyway, I'm searching again. Using the Dyns in the mean time... Kind of embarassed about the whole thing, but what can I do. It is what it is as we yanks say...
-Jax
With all due respect, you keep using expensive speakers with relatively low budget stuff. Don't you think it perhaps would be a good idea to step up on the rest of your system??
I doubt you will ever get the full benefit of the quality speakers you had/have as it stands. As always, my opinion only.
matthewpiano:BTW jaxwired, am I correct in thinking you had a pair of Spendors? I notice you've now got Dyns in your sig. What made you change?
Yes, I'm dumping the spendors. Very quick, here's why...while they are the best I've heard with jazz, classical, and acoustic material, they are just too rolled off on low frequencies for popular music. This makes a lot of the pop music I listen to seem a touch harsh because of the anemic low frequency output. I think they are too neutral. Anyway, I'm searching again. Using the Dyns in the mean time... Kind of embarassed about the whole thing, but what can I do. It is what it is as we yanks say...
-Jax
With all due respect, you keep using expensive speakers with relatively low budget stuff. Don't you think it perhaps would be a good idea to step up on the rest of your system??
I doubt you will ever get the full benefit of the quality speakers you had/have as it stands. As always, my opinion only.
SteveR750
Well-known member
Pmaninit:Does 'extended bass' mean it goes lower in the bass notes? Or does it mean more bass?
Sorry I mean lower. It is less loud (less "boomy") but there are two improvements IMO, one is that you can much more easily detect the tune that say a bass guitar is playing, i.e. it is easier to detect what frequency or note is being played. Secondly, you are also able to feel the lower frequencies, which bear in mind that your easr also detect sound that is transmitted through the floor into your body and bone structure. If you cant feel the effects of a bass drum being slammed hard then it won't really "sound" like one either.
jaxwired: The NAD C355 has a damping factor > 160
So do you think then that the NAD sounds "better" than the K2?
Sorry I mean lower. It is less loud (less "boomy") but there are two improvements IMO, one is that you can much more easily detect the tune that say a bass guitar is playing, i.e. it is easier to detect what frequency or note is being played. Secondly, you are also able to feel the lower frequencies, which bear in mind that your easr also detect sound that is transmitted through the floor into your body and bone structure. If you cant feel the effects of a bass drum being slammed hard then it won't really "sound" like one either.
jaxwired: The NAD C355 has a damping factor > 160
So do you think then that the NAD sounds "better" than the K2?
SteveR750
Well-known member
drummerman:jaxwired:
matthewpiano:BTW jaxwired, am I correct in thinking you had a pair of Spendors? I notice you've now got Dyns in your sig. What made you change?
Yes, I'm dumping the spendors. Very quick, here's why...while they are the best I've heard with jazz, classical, and acoustic material, they are just too rolled off on low frequencies for popular music. This makes a lot of the pop music I listen to seem a touch harsh because of the anemic low frequency output. I think they are too neutral. Anyway, I'm searching again. Using the Dyns in the mean time... Kind of embarassed about the whole thing, but what can I do. It is what it is as we yanks say...
-Jax
With all due respect, you keep using expensive speakers with relatively low budget stuff. Don't you think it perhaps would be a good idea to step up on the rest of your system??
I doubt you will ever get the full benefit of the quality speakers you had/have as it stands. As always, my opinion only.
I have to agree with this too. My C352 cannot drive the relatiovely easy B&W's that I am currently using. let alone a reasonably difficult load such as the 110's. If you go back to the late 70's this thinking was exactly what drove the Linn LP12 into the market. Up until the LP12, the conventional thinking was to spend more than half your budget on the speakers. Mind you, I'm sceptical that suddenly spending 75% of your budget on a turntable was the right answer either, from one extreme to the other.
matthewpiano:BTW jaxwired, am I correct in thinking you had a pair of Spendors? I notice you've now got Dyns in your sig. What made you change?
Yes, I'm dumping the spendors. Very quick, here's why...while they are the best I've heard with jazz, classical, and acoustic material, they are just too rolled off on low frequencies for popular music. This makes a lot of the pop music I listen to seem a touch harsh because of the anemic low frequency output. I think they are too neutral. Anyway, I'm searching again. Using the Dyns in the mean time... Kind of embarassed about the whole thing, but what can I do. It is what it is as we yanks say...
-Jax
With all due respect, you keep using expensive speakers with relatively low budget stuff. Don't you think it perhaps would be a good idea to step up on the rest of your system??
I doubt you will ever get the full benefit of the quality speakers you had/have as it stands. As always, my opinion only.
I have to agree with this too. My C352 cannot drive the relatiovely easy B&W's that I am currently using. let alone a reasonably difficult load such as the 110's. If you go back to the late 70's this thinking was exactly what drove the Linn LP12 into the market. Up until the LP12, the conventional thinking was to spend more than half your budget on the speakers. Mind you, I'm sceptical that suddenly spending 75% of your budget on a turntable was the right answer either, from one extreme to the other.
SteveR750 :
what you describe refers (not boomy etc.) to kandy k2 or nad 355 ?
i have also come to wonder whether in action NAD C355Bee sounds "better" than the K2.... anyway i checked 3100's manual , it says damping factor >100 (8 Ohm) while 355bee's manual says damping factor > 150 (8 Ohm) ... it's at least a good sign...
dont know maybe at that bargain price (under £350!!) that some stores DO sell 355 it's a real bargain....
epos character is special with NO extended bass and special mids (fantastic female vocals etc..) do you think that either 355 or k2 could make epos boom anyway ? or result in "muddy" sound like the one i get with 3100 ? i guess that both 3100's age along with its lesser wattage (60wpc) are to blame as reasons for this audio result... i repeat, (without having the chance to audition, unfortunately) maybe at the price some e-stores sell the 80wpc nad in UK it's a real bargain!!
final question, can one tell me if denon dl 103 cartridge (MC, 0,3 mV) is supported (will play ok) with either PP2 or PP3 Nad Phono stage ? i cannot understand (reading the specs...) sorry, please someone help me out..
what you describe refers (not boomy etc.) to kandy k2 or nad 355 ?
i have also come to wonder whether in action NAD C355Bee sounds "better" than the K2.... anyway i checked 3100's manual , it says damping factor >100 (8 Ohm) while 355bee's manual says damping factor > 150 (8 Ohm) ... it's at least a good sign...
dont know maybe at that bargain price (under £350!!) that some stores DO sell 355 it's a real bargain....
epos character is special with NO extended bass and special mids (fantastic female vocals etc..) do you think that either 355 or k2 could make epos boom anyway ? or result in "muddy" sound like the one i get with 3100 ? i guess that both 3100's age along with its lesser wattage (60wpc) are to blame as reasons for this audio result... i repeat, (without having the chance to audition, unfortunately) maybe at the price some e-stores sell the 80wpc nad in UK it's a real bargain!!
final question, can one tell me if denon dl 103 cartridge (MC, 0,3 mV) is supported (will play ok) with either PP2 or PP3 Nad Phono stage ? i cannot understand (reading the specs...) sorry, please someone help me out..
Just to reaffirm some of the comments that have been made, the NAD does have very good bass but you don't lose any of that with the K2, in fact I think you gain in depth of bass, it's more pronounced if that's the right word. Also the sound is cleaner and the beginning and ending of notes is also clearer. However there is one thing I would caution you on, it's not a revelation compared to the NAD but it really depends on what you are looking for in regards to the price difference. It is a notable improvement but I am not sure if it's worth paying double the money for.
matthewpiano
Well-known member
hi fi newbie:Just to reaffirm some of the comments that have been made, the NAD does have very good bass but you don't lose any of that with the K2, in fact I think you gain in depth of bass, it's more pronounced if that's the right word. Also the sound is cleaner and the beginning and ending of notes is also clearer. However there is one thing I would caution you on, it's not a revelation compared to the NAD but it really depends on what you are looking for in regards to the price difference. It is a notable improvement but I am not sure if it's worth paying double the money for.
Personally I believe that upgrading to any other amp below £1k is not going to be a revelation. The NADs really are that good, and if you go out spending money on something like a K2 or equivalent expecting it to trounce the NAD you are going to be disappointed. Will it be 'better'? In some ways yes, but you have to decide whether the climb in performance is reflective of the increased cost. After all, the price difference buys quite a lot of music.
Personally I believe that upgrading to any other amp below £1k is not going to be a revelation. The NADs really are that good, and if you go out spending money on something like a K2 or equivalent expecting it to trounce the NAD you are going to be disappointed. Will it be 'better'? In some ways yes, but you have to decide whether the climb in performance is reflective of the increased cost. After all, the price difference buys quite a lot of music.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram