2. amps-preamps
  3. 1404076868

Once again, impressed by NAD

I bought an NAD receiver for a small due room system 18 years ago. The only thing that remains of that system is the NAD receiver which has been in my basement for years now.

Well, my Pass INT-150 developed an intermittent fault so I shipped it out for repair. In the interim I pressed the NAD into service. Presently the only source connected to it is phono. And guess what- it sounds quite, quite good! It's astonishing that a receiver that had a $300 list 18 years ago can come close to a current $7150 integrated amp. Oh, the Pass is quieter, has a more robust and developed low end but overall the NAD is much more that just listenable.

Makes me wonder how much we hobbyists pay for that's last 15-20% of sound quality.
128x128zavato
lse
83 posts
 
I was blown away by the beautiful accuracy of the NAD M51 dac. It was better than almost every dac I've heard either before or since with the exception of the remarkable Bricasti product (costing several times more). Were I to have the spare cash, I'd get the Bricasti but I liked the NAD better than the Esoteric, MF, and several smaller companies. Obviously, there is a subjective element at play, but I think it is amazing it is one of the few quality dac/dac preamps out there with HDMI inputs which I really appreciate when listening to the 24 bit stereo content on SACDs, DVDs and Blueray discs.
sabai
2,027 posts
 
Lse,

I agree completely. I have owned EMM, Antelope, Berkeley, AMR and others. The NAD M51 totally outclassed them all. There may be better sounding DACs out there -- but not for the money. IMO.
zkzpb8
212 posts
 
Over the years, NAD has done great things... But the difference between affordable and hi-end amplifiers is much smaller than most people think...
zavato's avatar
zavato OP
1,403 posts
 
"The other conclusion is that the Pass integrated is not as good as you thought or your systems resolution is in some way compromised"

I'll say no to option one as years back when I had a Madrigal amp that needed service I once again temporarily use the NAD and had the same impression.

I'll agree to option two as mine is in no way an all out assault on the SOTA, but it's resolving enough. But I still,think the little NAD is the real deal on terms of sound quality.

Proof that hi-end need not mean big dollars
mulveling's avatar
mulveling
1,896 posts
 
Hey, an honest 15-20% improvement (though it's really nebulous to assign
percentages here, since we each have our own internal scales) for a $7K MSRP
layout is actually a GREAT deal these days in
this hobby, especially in non-transducer components. All too easily, you can
spend way more for way less. There were times when I would've been thrilled to
get 15% more performance from a specific component for $7K (say 3.5K used).
So I don't consider your experience to be a knock on the Pass; really more like
validation. And NAD has always been a respectable company that gives you a lot
of engineering and sound for the money.

I recently heard some new $8K cables in my system that were very subtly
different from my current ones -- really more like a side-grade. At least they
weren't obviously worse. Definitely NOT the way for a working class audiophile
to go.
More to discover