NAD C372 & Gallo Ref 3.1

Hey RL..........I think that NAD is a good product. I too owned them in the past. But "strong, ballsy" is a bit much. Amps that are ballsy double their RMS power from 8 to 4 ohms and then again at 2 ohms. The NAD doesn't come close. Note the specs on the NAD page talk about its "dynamic power" at 4 and 2 ohms and even that doesn't come close to doubling. Lets call a spade a spade. NAD is a very good mid fi piece. Nothing more.

ET

Mr. Jamesgarvin-dont wish to be rude but.....

who died and made you forum monitor? Ill response any way I wish. Its my time and I enjoy saying what I have to say about a item when there is a chance to do so. Its becoming a new trend to do this as you say because its a CHAT forum, and its not a new trend, its the way its always been. There any many people looking at these forums, myself included, who read through all the forums in order to gain knowledge and opionions on certain speakers. I believe I my opinion is as important as yours. And for the record I believe this statement below that was in my above response does let anyone interested in the following amps in the future know, they didnt do the job on the gallo 3.1's. Sometimes people look through these to see what other amps are recommended for the Gallo's if the NAD is said by some not to work well. Thats what I tried to do.

from above reply.
"Ive used the following amps on them if interested Ayre v-5xe, 8bst bridged(400watts x 2 8ohm), 8bst bi amped, 4bst, 9bsst. Non did what I hoped for. "

-But if this is what you want to hear to make you so upset. *** Ive never used NAD producta before. and have absolutely no idea how they would work. But the following response to me was found to be the biggest waste of time or space because it told us absolutely nothing about NAD or Gallo, and we are all now dumber for having to read it.

06-17-08: Jamesgarvin
Sthomas, how is your reply post in any way responsive to Katee's original post? Katee has a pair of Gallo 3.1 speakers, wants to know if a NAD ampifier will sufficiently drive them, and your response is that you do not like Gallo 3.1 speakers. This seems to be something of a trend where some posters feel compelled to provide their opinion on a subject, whether relevant or not to the original query.

You do not like the 3.1? Fine. Now answer the query - Do you think the NAD will drive them?

So you think your answer that you do not like Gallo speakers in response to a poster who already has Gallo speakers, presumably has listened to them, and presumably likes them, and is simply asking whether a particular brand of amplification, that you have apparently never owned, is a good match, is helpful?

I believe the term I have seen used for such conduct is "hijacking a thread." Not a term that I invented. You are certainly entitled to your opinions, that is what the boards are for, but why not start a thread containing your opinions, and then allowing others to comment? Why inject your opinion about the sound quality of a speaker when the poster did not ask for your opinion of the sound quality of the speaker? Because you obviously believe that your opinion is more important than helping another poster in their present audio situation.

Jamesgarvin,
Let it go. I agree with you. Some people feel compelled to state their opinions, regardless of their relevancy to the original question. Better to take a pass. I am sure katee knows the difference.

A good piece ( I think we all know which piece ) of this discussion reminds of me when I walked into a audio dealer
looking for a certain amplifier and his temperament towards
his potential customers that were there that day
was a little, no, a lot out of context. His animosity towards people in there could have easily scared off a lion. Not good business, not good relations.