NAD C352 vs Rotel RA-02 for Axiom M60ti
|
Unregistered guest | Which would be better? I've heard the NAD is a bit warmer, so that could compliment the Axiom's rumored "brightness", and it's twice the watts which is appealing. Yet I hear that the Rotel is clearer and that the NAD has muddy bass, so I'm not sure which to get. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Sun_kingLeeds, West Yorkshire UK Post Number: 33 Registered: Mar-04 | I don't like the C352. I much preferred the old C350, the bass IS muddy and not that extended. I wrote a favourable review of the C372 recently but I've since come to find the bass extension on that a bit lacking as I've explored my cd collection further. So the C352 and the C372 aren't as good as their predecessors in my opinion! I'd hunt around for a good used C370 and have done with it - cracking sound and bags of power. |
|
unbridled+id Unregistered guest | Hey mr king, with all due respect shouldn't you wait until the c372 "breaks in" a bit more.... I'm far from an audiophile, my exp is more vicarious through my many hrs spent on the internet searching. Your the first person to say that the c370 is better.... But, to each their own.. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkHighlands Ranch, CO USA Post Number: 531 Registered: Dec-03 | Thasp: I think the Rotel is a little under-powered to handle those speakers. It has a rated power of only 40 wpc, half that of the NAD, and that is not counting the NAD's dynamic headroom (which is considerable). I would get the NAD. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkHighlands Ranch, CO USA Post Number: 532 Registered: Dec-03 | BTW, I have both a Rotel (RX-1050) and an NAD (T753), and there is no way you can claim one is cleaner sounding than the other. The NAD has a warmer sound than the Rotel, and that may make some untrained ears believe it is cleaner, where others may think the Rotel is bass-shy. Neither conclusion is correct. It all comes down to what type of sound you prefer. |
|
Unregistered guest | A bit of reading around here and I see the C352 has the same amp as the C370. The Rotel is underpowered and the NAD is muddy.. ? This sure makes things easier. :P One site rates the Rotel at 55x2 watts after testing, but the NAD seems to be the better choice. I think I'll go with that. Thanks.  |
|
Unregistered guest | http://www.nadelectronics.com/reviews/C352-0404_framset.htm This speaks of a C352 and a C352CT... yet I only see the C352 on the NAD site. And the mentioning of the C352CT is ON the NAD site. Wow am I confused.  |
|
Bronze Member Username: Sun_kingLeeds, West Yorkshire UK Post Number: 34 Registered: Mar-04 | The CT isn't actually part of the model name, it just denotes a period of changeover from the naff amp to the remodelled one. Anything after a certain period is the 'CT' version. I don't know exactly when they changed over but I do know for sure that anything from the beginning of April this year is the CT version. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Sun_kingLeeds, West Yorkshire UK Post Number: 35 Registered: Mar-04 | Unbridled, I have listened to the C372 for over 30 hours and I believe that any solid state amp should be 'burned in' by then. I was hoping the lack of bass would improve and thought this was a running-in symptom.....but it never did. The C372 has a muddy unextended bass and for this reason alone I cannot recommend it over the C370. For me that amplifier has a depth of soundstage and extension of bass that the C372 can only dream about. My opinion but both amps played in the same system? I'd say it's concrete evidence. I don't see how anyone can think it's an improvement. |
|
unbridled+id Unregistered guest | I wonder if the 372 is suffering from the circuit problems the 352 was prior to changes being made.... |
|
Unregistered guest | ya know what, I think I'll go with the Rotel. Any company that makes newer/more expensive models argueably worse than the newer ones(350 vs 352, 370 vs 372, 320bee vs 352/372) isn't a company I'd like to buy from. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 11 Registered: Mar-04 | Hey thasp, the 352 as has been noted has had circuit changes and according to what hi-fi sounds fantastic... They put together two different systems for a couple to buy and they and the reviewer preferred to system with the nad 352 over the cambridge 640... I believe the changes made would make the 352 the integrated to buy... Like hawk mentioned the rotel only has 40 watts while the nad has double, this you will appreciate... I would go with the nad, at spearit sound.com they have refurbed 352's (brand new with the simple circuit change) for $429, thats a good deal as far as I am concerned... |
|
Unregistered guest | Does the C372 have the same circuit changes as the C352? The C372 does have a few bass probs, and I wouldn't wanna get it if it was similar to that. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Sun_kingLeeds, West Yorkshire UK Post Number: 39 Registered: Mar-04 | Thasp, The C372 hasn't been modified as Nad haven't accepted that it is lacking in any way. So no circuit changes (as yet).... My opinion of it lacking bass extension isn't a chronic fault but as the C370 had excellent, tuneful bass response and perfect depth, why has its replacement - a supposed improvement - been left wanting in this department? Just seems a backward step to me and I didn't notice the extra power in the new amp either. I found it a major let-down. |
|
Unregistered guest | Ah, so then it's linked to the older and crappier C352, not the newer one. Thanks for the info Sun King, much appreciated. http://www.spearitsound.com/nad/C352.asp <--- I think this is a good deal, a refurb. Are the refurbs the first C352s or the ones with the circuit changes, though? If it's the circuit changed one, that looks like a total winner. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Sun_kingLeeds, West Yorkshire UK Post Number: 41 Registered: Mar-04 | Thasp, I don't know. You'd have to contact them and ask. Seems a good chance that they will be the revamped ones because I can't see how a relatively new amp would be up for sale as "refurbished" - they haven't been out long enough to need fixing. Surely? |
|
Unregistered guest | Get What Hi-Fi June 2004 It has a brilliant write up on the NAD and compares with the Rotel, Cambridge Audio amd Marantz and it cleans up. |
|
SidFishes Unregistered guest | They're all sold out, what does it say? |
|
beatnic Unregistered guest | Cambridge Audio Azur 640A ***** + Fine grasp of dynamics and timing; pleasing detail resolution; solid casework - Control knobs feel cheap but that's about it Marantz PM7200 **** + Sweet and seductive midrange; impressive refinement; extensive features - Slight shortfalls in dynamic punch and drive leave it exposed against the competition NAD C352CT ***** + Superlative sound combines finesse amd power brilliantly - Flimsy casework; control feels cheap compared with some at this price Rega Brio **** + Smooth, refined and enjoyable sound; good phono stage - Sounds a little too polite against the competition, no remote Rotel RA-01 **** + Excellent build; forceful sonic presentation; decent phono stage - Lacks the finesse and refinement if the best in this group just wondering does Rotel RA-01's drop in a star means the same with RA-02? lol |
|
SidFishes Unregistered guest | Apologies, Marcus, for my last post. The link provided above by Thasp clears it up for me. Maybe WhatHiFi should review the C372 so we can then have a C372CT. |
|
SidFishes Unregistered guest | Oh wow, thanks a lot beatnic. 'Thought I was asking way too much. |
|
Anonymous | 'HiFi Choice' has reviewed both the NAD 352CT and Marantz PM 7200. Not a straight comparison, but its panel points system (for what it is worth?) rates the Marantz slightly above (2 pts) the NAD. But it thinks the Nad is about as good as the Marantz, though against, it lacks a phono preamp and looks a bit spartan. They still seem to rate the old NAD 350 pretty highly. The problem with 'What HiFi?' is that it goes for what it sees as market-value on a 'continuous evolution' principle, which may be justified, but is sometimes caused by the excitement of 'up-to-date snobbery' ('modern tastes in forward sound are better than old-fashioned sonic values' and 'after 3 years, a design is obsolescent'). I think 'HiFi Choice' has its own snobberies, but is more cautious and liberal in this matter! |
|
Janez Unregistered guest | Still not sure about C-352CT amp - does CT stand for Colour Titanium only or has been some real improvement made over plain C-352? Is CT version available in dark grey colour? Which one is better - C-352CT or C-320BEE - as I normally listen at lower volumes. Speakers are B&W 602S3 now connected on Yamaha AX-530 amp. It sounds very sharp and tiring to my ears. Thanks for any advise/explanation Janez |
|
August Unregistered guest | The situation is very confusing. Nad states that the "old" C 352 integrated amplifier reviewed in `What Hi-Fi?' last year was an early prototype that never entered the market. In recent issues `What Hi-Fi?' presents NAD C 352 CT as a "new" upgraded amplifier replacing the "old" one. According to NAD the `CT' notation is just a code for voltage and finish (titanium) and that this is the model sold ever since its release in autumn last year. In that sense there is no "new" version. |
|
Olivier Unregistered guest | Same here. I do not know whether to buy the C320BEE or C352(CT?) or C372. I want to drive Dynaudio's Audience 52 or 62 with it. Any feedback most welcome ! |
|
SidFishes Unregistered guest | It was giving me a headache aswell. I took on board Anon's comments above regarding the "up-to-date snobbery" of WhatHiFi and went for a second hand C350. This 50 watter cost me £130 and drives my Tannoy R3s through hefty Cat 5 cables with ease, better, in fact than the 90W Technics 900MkII I replaced. From where i'm standing now it looks like Hi Fi Choice has a point, and with this in mind the Arcam Alpha 8 might also be worth considering in the second hand market. |
|
Unregistered guest | Here's the reply from NAD regards the difference between C-352 and C-352CT (there's none except color): "Thank you for your recent request via the NAD Electronics web-site. In light of the fantastic review that we had for the C352 from What Hi Fi, there have been a couple of consumers and dealers raise a question regarding how to tell the difference between the old and the "new, improved" version. So for the record, here it is. All units for sale in both Grey and Titanium are the new improved version. What Hi Fi reviewed a prototype model of the c352 in June last year and gave it a three star rating. As a result of this, NAD made some subtle changes to the design. All our customers have the "new, improved" version. The "CT" referred to in the text is reference to the colour only, if you note the text beside the picture you will see that it is still labelled as a C352. Titanium is not available in North America. The changes made to the unit are as follows: We improved the DC servo circuit which tightens up the bass response. In a complementary amplifier design, the positive and negative halves of the waveform are handled by different "complementary" transistors - the gain of each half of the circuit must be perfectly balanced or there will a DC voltage present at the speaker outputs. With the original C352s, this DC offset could drift in and out of perfect balance. When out of balance the sound would not be to spec., especially noticeable in the bass region performance. The "fix" was to add a high speed servo circuit that always keeps the DC offset at zero. In point of fact, all C352's sold to the public include this circuit." Hope it clears things out... So, I'm going to buy dark grey C-352, as all my other units are black. |
|
Unregistered guest | Dear readers, Last Tuesday (15.06.2004) I bought the C352 Amplifier and the C542 CD-player and hooked them up with QED XT-350 speaker cables to KEF Q5's and Van Den Hul D102 III Hybride interlink and the well known "Missing Link" from Tara Labs in order to connect the pre-out and the main-in amp and it sounds marvelous (get rid of that U bars)!!! I've been searching around a lot and after a while one of the shop owners told me that the extra you pay for the C372 are for those additional item's you'll never use like 'bridging'the Amp into a Mono block, or adding an extra set of speakers etc. etc. and oh yeah 150 Watt per 8 Ohm on each channel. Hey did ya know that when ya listen to a speaker on a 'social'level of sound that you have enouch with an Amp that can supply around 30 Watts, so why bother. Buy the C352 (nearly 90 Watt in 8 Ohm per channel and you can't get wrong)in grey or Titanium colour(CT is Colour Titanium) hook one of their CD players on and enjoy !! Both C320BEE and C542 are stunners ! Good luck to ya'll Arian - the Netherlands. |
|
Silver Member Username: Sun_kingLeeds, West Yorkshire UK Post Number: 103 Registered: Mar-04 | Arian, Sounds like a good system you have there. The cdp and speakers are excellent and if Nad have sorted the bass response on the C352 then that too. |
|
New member Username: ShadowthebeastPost Number: 1 Registered: Sep-04 | Hello, is there a NAD C 272 CT ? |
|
Bronze Member Username: DanmanPost Number: 72 Registered: Apr-04 | First....NO C 272 CT...Don't need it! Second........I have the M60's with a 372 now bi-amped with a 272 as of a couple of weeks along with M3's as a second set and a HSU VTF mk2. This was by far the best combo I have heard for many years at this price range. Of course you know your own particular tastes and that is what counts the most. Third...........What is it with this bass response thing with NAD??? I talked to many dealers in my travels and none knew what the heck I was talking about. They told me maybe the 352 had a teething problem but no one ever really could pin point it after an initial listening test! To their professional opinion, NAD just fixed a small capacitor that would not work properly with a demanding speaker that is all! I find it amusing how one person reads something and than actually believes he or she hears it! This is kind of like the conversation about 1000$ cables and expensive speaker spikes! |
|
Bronze Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 46 Registered: Mar-04 | Hey sun-king I know how you feel about that sense circuit in the nad c272 but just in case I got some info for you. A message from my nad dealer.... Hi Joe, Yes the input circuit has been corrected. All new C272 will have the revised circuit. In addition, an upgrade is available to existing NAD C272 customers, provided that it was purchased through an Authorized Dealer. I know, I know, you don't use it but just in case you get the urge.... |
|
Bronze Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 44 Registered: Sep-04 | Olivier, I know the Dynaudios very well. Go for the more powerful of the two if you can. The Dyns just suck power. Thasp, Although the rated power of the amps is different, in practice you'll find they produce the same amount of noise at the same volume setting on the dial when played into the same speakers. The Rotel is more powerful than it seems. Both are good machines. Any chance of finding a dealer who has both in the shop and getting an A/B demo? That would be best. The presentation of the two is different. The Rotel is a little clearer, but the NAD swings a little better in my view. Not sure which I'd choose. Oh and in my view the latest NADs are better than the old ones - a lot better. I think Sun King likes a slightly bass-heavy presentation (if not, I apologise Sun King!). regards, Frank. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Anyone considering an NAD or Rotel should read the past few days worth of posts on "Teaching an old dog new tricks" under the "DVD-A..." portion of the forum. Several folks have found a really great amp for around $700 that you should know about. |
|
Anonymous | I'm planning to buy Dynaudio Audience 52 SE monitors, and I'm not sure which of these two amplifiers would work better with them: NAD C352 or Cambridge Audio Azur 640A. I'm leading the balance towards NAD, as it's more powerful. |
|
NAD FAN Unregistered guest | Heres my two cents worth: Original system: A&R EB101/K9 NAD 3130 Sherwood CD5010R B&W DM303 on stands The NAD was 22 years old, working fine, but I felt would be worth replacing for something newer. I loved the 3130 for its slam and sheer musical dynamics, so another NAD was obvious... The sherwood was a fine £180 player in 1993, but again now out of date. CD choice was easy...Cambridge 640c with its super sharp dynamic presentation. Amp, well i went with the 640c on the strength of reviews on a 14 day home trial. Didnt sounds great out of the ox, but run in improved immensely, and is a great sounding amp..but that NAD "slam" was missing (sounded like Rotel IMO). So the 640a was returned and replaced with a C352CT. Wow! awesome amplifier, all of that NAD deep chested grunt is there, but is as fast and delicate as the 640. But, to put into perspective, the 352 is £100 more expensive than the 640, but its worth it!! |
|
New member Username: TzeleungPost Number: 7 Registered: Oct-04 | Do you guys know where I can buy the NAD C352 CT version, and what is the price different between the c352 and c352ct? |
|
OnimushaLord Unregistered guest | The C352 and C352CT are exactly the same, in fact the CT suffix was added to denote "color titanium". All units sold by NAD to the public have the upgrade incorporated, so no inferior unit. What HiFi reviewed the prototype unit earlier and gave it a moderate rating(at this time, no units were for sale yet to the public). NAD team rectified the flaw before releasing it for purchase by the public, so all units are exactly C352CT in nature/sound quality, only colour difference exists. Even on the titanium unit itself, you can it labelled as C352 only, no "CT" notation at all So whatever unit u buy should be the improved version. You can call up NAD to confirm this. Cheers. |
|
Anonymous | now i am confused. so is 352ct difrent ( betetr) than c352?? |
|
Anonymous | and which amp do you think is better for acoustic energy (AEGIS EVO One)???? and is it thrue that some audiphills says that more power is better( aldow some people never belives that, they think!) |
|
Bronze Member Username: Ca_convertCardiffUK Post Number: 48 Registered: Jan-05 | Anon, The C352 and C352CT are the SAME amplifier. The problem stems from some dumbass at What hi fi referred to the 352 "in its' original guise....NAD reworked the bottom end.." and voila a butterfly was born. Here is what really happened. NAD (perhaps foolishly given the correspondance in this forum alone) allowed a sneak preview of its new "baby" which was declared ugly. This is the "original" 352 incarnation, but WAS NOT FOR SALE TO THE PUBLIC, it was a PROTOTYPE. NAD sorted out the output stage which wasnt functioning correctly on the proto (which made it sound er woolly) and then launched the product to us the masses. You can only buy a "good" C352. For what its worth in mine and many others opinions, the 352 is far from being limited in its bottom end, and far from being woolly and slow. It is like most budget NAD's before it: powerful, dynamic, with a great deal of control for the price. Its also an improvement over the 350 (again my opinion) in that its soundstage positioning is much more stable, dynamics are slightly better (listen to a rock drum kit being played live and not through a PA system to get an idea of what dynamics are really about - the snare drum should leap into your ears with a real crack; then go listen to the same on a piece of even half decent gear and it is not even really close). Cant help you with the AE question, though am considering the aegis evo 3's with a C352. |
|
supersonic Unregistered guest | convert, I have the AE Evo 3s and they're excelllent speakers! I chose them after auditioning the B&W 603s and some Paradigms. The AEs produce very well defined bass and overall I would say they offer more detail and better soundstage than those other speakers I auditioned. I can't recommend you to pair them with a C352 though. You probably know this from another thread already, I tried replacing my Arcam with a C352 and it was a no-go. After reading your explanation on dynamics, I'm inclined to say that the C352 is lacking in that department. I listen to various kinds of music; house, pop rock, trip hop, classical, acoustic, alternative etc and they all sound a lot better with the Arcam Alpha 7. Maybe you should look for an amp with similar charateristics as the Arcam if you're going to get the AEs. Just my 2 cents. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Ca_convertCardiffUK Post Number: 51 Registered: Jan-05 | Hmmm The 352 is easily the most dynamic amp I have heard at its price level measured by "my" criteria. I would prefer to find a set of speakers to go with the amp rather than start again from scratch. I am going to audition the Epos M5's after the WHF review in feb edition. Floorstanders are no longer a definite requirement. Super, I havent heard the Alpha 7 so I cant comment. However I do like the Arcam A65 that i auditioned, but couldnt justify the additional £'s |
|
New member Username: WolfsonPost Number: 4 Registered: Jan-05 | I must say I disagree with Supersonic. This is one hell of an amp that should have been given some more time before it was taken back. Often times people mistake extra midrange and treble for better sound. The older Aracam stuff is that way and pushes the mids and highs. Not in a bad way there are just more mids and highs with older Arcam stuff. They newer models are more neutral. In the case of the NAD it is DEAD neautral with no part of the frequency spectrum being overdone. Very balanced with great sound transparancy and soundstaging abilities with first rate dynamics. Just my two cents. Wolf |
|
Anonymous | thaks you guys |
|
Anonymous | thank you guys |
|
Anonymous | exuse me for asking this... but what kind of sound is ''warm sound''?? |
|
New member Username: TevoChicago, IL USA Post Number: 7 Registered: Feb-05 | "Warm" means the frequency response is weighted towards the bass and midrange with less at the treble. The sound is lush, mellow and the presentation is laid-back. When overdone, it can be said to be "dark" sounding and this is not tonally accurate. The music lacks energy and involvement. A bit of warmth is natural. And one of my personal judgments on whether it sounds good is the ability to listen for long periods of time without tiring. I do not like over bright, over forward presentations and hate excess sibiliance. By the same token, it shouldn't be so mellow that I want to drift off to sleep... A good resource on expanding your understanding of the audiophile lexicon is: http://www.stereophile.com/reference/50/index.html Cheers. |
|
New member Username: TevoChicago, IL USA Post Number: 8 Registered: Feb-05 | Correction to my post... "presentation is laid-back" should be "presentation MIGHT be laid-back". |
|
Unregistered guest | Guys, does anyone know if it would be OK to match NAD c352 with KEF Q7 pair? Have anyone tried this combo? What about bi-wiring? |
|
Anonymous | just heard that kef and nad go together perfectlly |
|
Anonymous | I've heard NAD C352 with AE EVO3. Very good sound, the best choice at this price. |
|
Anonymous | really? why do you think that. do you think that on evo 3 threre is no difference bettwen c320 and c352?? |
|
Anonymous | I just got a new C352 and plan to compare it with my Audio Research VS55 tube amp... more later! |
|
Anonymous | can't wait... |
|
New member Username: Andrius68St. Petersburg, Russia Russia Post Number: 1 Registered: Mar-05 | Guys, does anyone know if Arcam 73 and NAD 352 can work really good together? And how about Wharfedale 9.1 in combination with them? |
|
Bronze Member Username: EllisonPost Number: 19 Registered: Mar-05 | I think the NAD 352 will work well with Whardale 9.1. I owe 9.1 and Nad 320. But I think you can go a little bit further for the speaker. The 9.1 is low sensitive speaker. Iam using MS914 with my NAD 320 & 521cdp. |
|
Unregistered guest | I plan to use a NAD C350 with C272 to biamping. Is it good idea ? |
|
Bronze Member Username: WolfsonPost Number: 12 Registered: Jan-05 | Check with NAD they may not be gain matched like the C270 was. The C352 is matched to the C272 for gain. Wolf |
|
Bronze Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 93 Registered: Feb-05 | Read a review of a Wharfedale speaker yesterday in the April/May issue of "The Absolute Sound" and the reviewer really liked the Wharfedale/NAD combo. |
|
Anonymous | I used Monster XP speaker cable with NAD320BEE and ONKYO DV502 Universal DVD player. I get irritating ssssssssss when the vocal involved starting with "s". I have DM 309 of B&W. Any suggestion to get rid of this problem in vocals ? Is NAD 352 better? The same happens with Kimber 4PR. I used QED qnex 2 interconnects. Except the 'sssss''' , the sound seems really good compared to my Arcam alpha 3 , old streo amp.. |
|
bumblebee Unregistered guest | check your speakers. |
|
AudioFreak Unregistered guest | Thanks bumbleebee!! I think I will get it checked with B&W dealer. Do you feel DVD player would cause this and so I use a dedicated CD Player? I am considering NAD 521BEE or Cambridge Audio 640 C. ANy Idea which is better with NAD C 352? |
|
bumblebee Unregistered guest | audiofreak, speakers can be sibilant. i don't know about electronics. the NAD c542 cd player will be a better match for the c352. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TwebbzAnn Arbor, Michigan USA Post Number: 61 Registered: Apr-04 | Gentlemen, Axiom M50ti...characterized as "warm" speakers and NAD C352? Any comments on this combination? By the way, posters on the Axiom site insist that the Axioms are not bright. Of course, one has to take the plunge and order them for a personal auditory audition. |
|
Silver Member Username: Sun_kingLeeds, West Yorkshire UK Post Number: 227 Registered: Mar-04 | I'd perhaps try to get a more lively speaker to pair with Nad amps, which are in the warm sector themselves. You don't want the sound to be too laid-back! You need to thing long term though, also. People tend to keep speakers longer than they keep their amps. Do you forsee buying a more forward amp further down the line? Take that into consideration. Maybe a neutral speaker would be your best bet in the long run. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TwebbzAnn Arbor, Michigan USA Post Number: 62 Registered: Apr-04 | Well, the Axiom M50ti is the right size floorstander, looks great and the driver compliment of a titanium dome and two six inch woofers is what I'm looking for ($700). (For a den.) Paradigm is the rage but the Monitor 7 is bigger and more than what I want to pay ($800). Then there is the Energy C5 which seems to be up for redesign and not available. JMlab Chorus is out of my price range($1000+). Ditto Kef Q5 ($900). So you see, I always come back to the Amxiom M50Ti 'cause it SEEMS like it will work for me when I refer to the reviews. Ya know, I have a NAD 370 driving Athena AS-F2s. I guess I'll just hook it up and try the combination before I go looking for another amp. SO, Which are the better, moderately priced, "more forward" integrated amps...around 80+wpc? |
|
Silver Member Username: Sun_kingLeeds, West Yorkshire UK Post Number: 228 Registered: Mar-04 | Sounds like you've got your mind set on those speakers Rick! Go get 'em. I love the warm Nad midrange so you won't find me pressing you in the direction of other amps. The Marantz PM7200 is a bit more lively but not bright, definitely a contender. It's the only other amp I'd consider around the same price as the C352. I find the Rotel stuff a bit too "in yer face" which presumably you will too judging by your present kit. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TwebbzAnn Arbor, Michigan USA Post Number: 68 Registered: Apr-04 | Hmmmm...It has been written that the Axiom M50ti has a dip in the midrange at the 2.2kHz crossover point. Maybe a bit of "in yer face" with the Rotel would be of benefit here...AND, Rotel has the RX-1052 at 100Wpc, a receiver eliminating the need for a separate tuner...Something to think about. |
|
milpai Unregistered guest | I recently purchased the NAD C352 to go with my Marantz SA8260 and Quad 21L. I am happy with the output that I get from my system. I am using Nordost 4 Flat bi-wires. The best way to decide on a component is to find a very good dealer and audition the product(s) you like. My dealer even offered to lend me a couple of components for a week or so. Company names don't matter...but your ears/hearing matters a lot. And to think of it, I had not shortlisted the Quads for auditioning :-) |
|
deepthought Unregistered guest | UPDATE: Rotel has just replaced the RA-02 with the RA-03. Some minor tweaks presumably to address the critic's complaints. I have owned an RA-01 for about 2 years and can listen to it for hours on end with no fatigue (not too in my face!). I auditioned the NAD and found it too warm (This was purely a personal preference and proves that HIFI is a deeply personal pursuit!) |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 975 Registered: Sep-04 | No, the RA-02 lives on. The RA-03 comes in above the 02. In the UK the 03 is twice the price of the 02 too. It bridges the gap between the 02 and the 1062, which hasn't sold well even though it's an excellent amplifier. Regards, Frank. |
|
redsnapper Unregistered guest | Great site, love the informed discussion. In respect of the mighty NAD: I started many years back with a NAD 3020E. This lasted 12 years and was still going strong when I moved to Saudi. The new freedom of "I have no wife" meant that I could buy something better. I lstened to a few amp and speaker combos (Musical Fidelity, Naim, Castle, Tannoy.. there are some good HiFi shops in Riyadh) before settling for a NAD C370 and Tannoy Revolution R2's. The NAD was quite an amp.. good separation, soundstage, depth, balanced, great with vocals and strings, and masses of creamy power in reserve if you needed it. I ended up leaving Riyadh to work in the Caribbean and took all my gear with me. On leaving the Caribbean to return to Riyadh for another stint, I sold the NAD and Tannoys. I again auditioned various bits of kit in my local friendly Riyadh dealer and had the chance to do a back to back listening of the Naim Nait 5, NAD C352 and the old NAD350 (he had one left on discount). I wanted to buy the Naim (too long with NAD, time for a change) but found that both the Naim and the C352 were somewhat bright and brittle, with a slight nasality to vocals. I was running both through different Castle speakers after warming up and using good Chord cables. As a last resort I switched to the NAD C350, wondering if it was the speakers. And thus I bought it.. IMHO instantly more relaxed and balanced than my two shortlisters. I also managed to pick up a pair of Quad L12's.. beautiful speakers. Not yet sure if they are best suited to the NAD though.. slightly fat on the bass, warm, almost chocolate lows.. running chord single wire cables.. (would appreciate any advice here). Anyway, my point is that there is a tendancy for the Hifi press to continually justify their existence (and to maintain their advertising revenue) by downrating previous 'best buy' equipment after a year and replacing this with the latest model, even when this may be an actual backstep in real terms. Don't believe what you read, listen to what you hear. |
|
Unregistered guest | no talk of the 340, this is my current amp i've never owned another amp so not knowing any better i would love some advice on what next to buy, to me the 340 sounds a bit slow and the treble is a bit bright which is a pain when using metal dome tweeters and listening to dance and rock,i'm looking for a clean thrilling sound with lots of detail but still with a bit of warmth, to me warmth can make music more musical and emotional im sure you'll agree but should'nt sound slow, the speakers im using are monitor audio bronze b2, looking for advice on amp and cd player. |
|
Unregistered guest | no talk of the 340, this is my current amp i've never owned another amp so not knowing any better i would love some advice on what next to buy, to me the 340 sounds a bit slow and the treble is a bit bright which is a pain when using metal dome tweeters and listening to dance and rock,i'm looking for a clean thrilling sound with weighty bass and lots of detail but still with a bit of warmth, to me warmth can make music more musical and emotional im sure you'll agree but should'nt sound slow, the speakers im using are monitor audio bronze b2, looking for advice on amp and cd player. |
|
happynadders Unregistered guest | I'm using 521BEE / 320BEE linked with QED QUNEX 1, connected with QED Original BiWire MkII to Wharfedale Diamond 9.1 All 5 stars (budget) parts as suggested by What Hi-Fi, and I absolutely love it. I have also auditioned Cambridge Audio and Rotel, but ended up getting NAD. The warm and fluid sound is sold me. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Dan_the_manLondon, Ontario Canada Post Number: 64 Registered: Jun-04 | i have a dual purpose system both for HT and music listening. I have a maranatz sr-6300 and M-60 axiom front speakers. It is an excellent combination, great sound staging in stereo. Medicore performance in HT. The marantz is worthy of consideration as is the Denon 3805. Not sure if you need a 7.1 reciever though. I know that is off the topic of the original post but i wanted to ask if you had considered either manufactorer prior to deciding on the NAD and the Rotel. I myself if had to choose would almost hands down choose the rotel based on reputation alone. l8tr |
|
Silver Member Username: DanmanQUEBEC CANADA Post Number: 624 Registered: Apr-04 | Rotel does not have any better a reputation than does NAD Dan! Both are fine gear and do what they do better than all others at the same price. Buying something only for its reputation is fine but does not mean you will get the sound you want. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummNew York USA Post Number: 722 Registered: Feb-05 | I totally agree! I myself own rotel gear, but have been equally pleased listening to systems built around NAD gear. It all depends upon personal preference. |
|
New member Username: Lancia_betaPost Number: 1 Registered: Apr-06 | i am waiting on delivery on my C352 and C542 cd player. These I plan on combining with a Denon tuner and Bose 901. Am wodering how these will match up, any input out there? |
|
New member Username: Lancia_betaPost Number: 2 Registered: Apr-06 | i am waiting on delivery on my NAD C352 and Nad c542 cd player. Am planning on using them with my Dennon tuner and Bose 901. Wondering if that will work well, any thoughts? |
|
New member Username: TalielamaPost Number: 1 Registered: Nov-06 | Sure it will drive your Bose. I suspect it will drive anything. Well, what can I say? I like amplifiers, and I bought the C-352 on Audiogon on an impulse. Theoretically, it shouldn't come close to my others which include a Roksan Kandy, a Jolida 502B (Canadian Partz Mod), and a set of Audio Research Separates among others. To make matters worse, I am driving Magnepan 1.6 QR's right now which I alternate with Aerial 6's. So what about this NAD which costs less than half of anything else I have? I like it. It works. It sucks me into the music, making me forget about which amplifier I am listening to. If you have speakers you are worried about driving, I am driving the Maggies with it right now, and they sound great. You can tell when an amp has heft when you can actually see the panels moving before it runs out of gas. The 352 can move the panels with grace. It can play loud without "shouting" at you. It can play softly. It doesn't disappear at low volumes the way some gear does. I am constantly amazed at the sonic differences among amplifiers. Yes, it is different. Some things it does better, and some things worse. It can't touch the Jolida for imaging. The Jolida can't touch it for dynamics. It can't touch the Kandy for detail. The Kandy is a little dry though. The NAD is actually closer to the Audio Research pocket sonically, which is very good real estate, albeit perhaps with a tad less clarity. (But we're talking gear ten times the price.) Bass? Heck yeah, it's got bass, Depending on your source material, it's as good on the bottom as anything really. It's the tonal balance down there that's important. The NAD seems to have good control. Sometimes an amplifier with sloppy control (insufficient dempening) is mistaken for having more bass. The NAD Sounds good across the spectrum. Cosmetics? I like the look. I love having a remote. I'm not crazy about the plactic. I can't find my way around it in the dark the way I can the Kandy. I'd say my favorite amps for useability are the Kandy and the AR. I don't care for the volume settings becaust that just-right sweet spot i like to listen to I can't seem to get vis the remote. I have to reach over and manually adjust the volume. Notes: You have to let this one warm up. It doesn't want to sing when it's cold. After several hours it really opens up. I wouldn't turn it off. My unit is used, but I suspect it takes a while to break this one in. Buy it, plug it in, turn it on and leave it on unless you're going on vacation. And enjoy the music. |
|
New member Username: Carlos_mGreat YarmouthEngland Post Number: 7 Registered: Oct-06 | Hi Michael, I agree completely with you about the nad 352. IT really allowe us to enjoy the music. In my opinion that amplifier is much better than its price suggest. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Jingka99Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Post Number: 47 Registered: Aug-06 | same obervation for me, particularly with regards to the source, poorly recorded music will be pass on as it is...as they say, garbage in garbage out.... In my case, it normaly takes at least 30 minutes to really get it to sing...or more if it comes from power off... I normally listen during the night to avoid the noise coz I live in an appartment facing a main road so you can imagine in the busy hours, the noise from the cars are really annoying...and i don;t have a dedicated listening room nor any acoustic room treatment employed...during this time, I can really appreciate the music...detail and clarity(to my ears) are evident, instruments and voices are accurate...a bit more warm I can say...I have tried once comparing the C320BEE and the C352 and I noticed that the C320BEE is more fast pace and the bass is a bit more weighty and dynamic whereas the C352 exhibits more finesse in delivery, the bass has plenty of weight too, solid but compose and the trebel is precise and clear... |
|
Bronze Member Username: Jingka99Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Post Number: 48 Registered: Aug-06 | oh, i just came across this: http://www.avreview.co.uk/news/article/mps/UAN/652/v/3/sp/ sorry if this was already posted... |
|
New member Username: Carlos_mGreat YarmouthEngland Post Number: 10 Registered: Oct-06 | Thanks Arnorld, the link was very informative. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Jingka99Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Post Number: 55 Registered: Aug-06 | Hi Carlos, ur welcome! But most of it we know already right?? It more or less made us C352 owners appreciate more what we have! and enjoy the music we like! |
|
New member Username: Castle2006Post Number: 1 Registered: Dec-06 | Hello! I need a manual/pics for the back connections for a Castle acoustics, Eden speaker. They were probably made in the 90's. Any help ASAP would be great! |
|
Bronze Member Username: Carlos_mGreat YarmouthEngland Post Number: 13 Registered: Oct-06 | Hi castle, I advise you to contact the Castle Acoustics and ask the Eden`s speaker manual. Regards, Carlos |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics