12yr old NAD receiver or new?


My 12yr old NAD receiver recently broke and I am deciding whether it would be better to fix or buy new. i am thinking of buying something simple and inexpensive - like a Sony (gasp) because it has a low distortion ratio and I dont need all of the other inputs. my house is too small, as are my kids, to set up dolby surround and multiple speakers.

i want this mainly for music not dvds. am i better off getting the NAD fixed or is the sony good enough? Or if I want great sound, but don't need all of the additional inputs - what brand/model should I look to buy?

I would be happy to shell out a few hundred more bucks if I thought I was paying for improved quality and not additional inputs I won't use. what do you think?
weissmandf100
AT 12 years it's probably not worth investing in. The above posters have the best idea. Get an integrated either here or new.
I agree with the above posts. A 12 year old NAD is a nice piece, but the cost of repairing it would be a large percentage of new modern integrated and possibly more than half that of a brand new NAD 320BEE.