Can a new amplifier affect speaker placement?


Hi all,

So I went out and got me a shiny new amp. One thing I'm certain I've noticed is the bass isn't as rich as with the old amp. The new amp is well-known for its bass response. The old one may have been too (don't remember) - but it's less than half the power and a fourth the cost of the new one. Both amps are overachievers in their price category. In short - I've trouble believing my little Creek 5350SE has bigger bass than my NAD M2. I wonder if something else is going on. Has anyone had to re-position their speakers, following a new amp purchase?
sturgl
"With HUGE dynamics like this, I could get into this whole classical thing!"

Funny how that works! Dynamics is a big part of how classical music impacts us. When it is not there as it should be, things suffer.
I just thought of something you may want to try. Every NAD integrated that I've seen jumps the amp and preamp sections with an external rca jumper, just like your Creek. I would use the Creeks preamp and go directly into the amplifier section of the NAD. This may sound like an odd thing to do, but on several occasions I've seen loss of bass was due to the preamp, and not the amp.
Zd,

That would be an interesting exercise - I could try the Creek as my pre and the M2 as my amp. The M2 is quite an unusual integrated though. It takes digital feeds directly from sources, and effectively amplifies them. That's not to say it's an amp with a DAC built-in a la Peachtree or similar. Rather, one might think of it as a DAC with amplification capabilities. One might do even better to think of the DAC as non-existent - to think of it as a "digital" amplifier (note that Class D does not mean 'digital' - this is a misnomer), yielding a similar purity of signal that an analog source might achieve with just about any other amplifier. No digital to analog conversion takes place, just a sort of re-mapping if you will.

Conversion in the M2 actually comes in to play in converting analog sources to "digital" (I'll use/abuse 'digital' here rather than getting further than I'm qualified into pulse wave modulation and NAD's efforts to map the digital signal to PWM (which also essentially operates as a 1/0 or on/off, similar in concept to digital). The amp's architecture is similar in concept to units from TacT or Lyngdorf - though its sonics purportedly surpass these (I admit I wouldn't know personally!).

It's quite a feat of engineering really - and a bit surprising I think to come from NAD of all companies. I'd be very surprised if we don't see many similar products coming to market in the next few years, particularly in the world of home theater. The M2 is still ugly looking - NAD hasn't completely forgotten its roots! So... while I'll probably take on this exercise (I'm a tinkerer) for the helluvit, I think it would negate the M2's raison d'etre. ...and if I like the sound better, well, god help me!
You could not try the Creek as your pre and the M2 as your amp because the M2 has no preamp and therefore no preamp outs.
I doubt the M2 is designed to take an input from an external analog pre-amp and would think twice about even trying that unless absolutely sure.

FOster, how are you liking the M2? WOuld love to hear that on my OHMs someday.