NAD M23 Stereo Amplifier: Best Amp Ever Bench Tested?!?

Exactly!

So why did you post Gene’s review?

And why is there so much of this Purfi stuff that is discounted, refurbed and sold used? Especially the NAD stuff?

D.B. I really want to know.

Gee, if you don't like Putzey amps, why the Rogue?

Oh and to answer your stupid question I did not care for the Purfi amps nor the implementation by NAD, Nord and Apollo. 

One needs to consider the source, as it were, and discount accordingly.

@soix

As much as audio is a science it’s also an art, and the art is how the equipment ultimately matches with our tastes and unique hearing abilities that IMO cannot all be measured but must be experienced.

I agree with that to a point, that is why I don’t do this:

Then, we’re also able to glean that if the vast majority of reviewers and customers say that something exhibits the sound qualities we’re looking for it’s also worth exploring

I don’t waste my time with other’s subjective opinion. See above.


Sure, I might miss out on something but that is a possibility no matter if I filter by performance or by what other’s think. The difference is performance is a factual metric that can be compared, ranked, etc. Other people’s opinions are usually all over the board and are never based on the amp in my system in my room. I find their value less than marginal.

I don't have bat ears either... and I still like the sound of my 1986 Integra Tx-88 receiver, and love the sound of my little $600 Marantz nr1200 receiver, and ...

I'd bet the NAD is far from junk...  maybe it ain't to one's taste, but it ain't junk.

@facten 

I haven't heard the NAD M23 but I have owned and heard other Putzey designed amps, UCD, Ncore, and Purifi over the years. I have found that Ncore and Purifi are very similar with more refinement in the higher frequencies with Purifi. Neither really has "a sound". They are very neutral, by design.

@curtdr 

I'd bet the NAD is far from junk...  maybe it ain't to one's taste, but it ain't junk.

Of course it isn't. Like I said, consider the source.