|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.140.88.103
In Reply to: RE: From NAD C320BEE to C165/C275BEE posted by airtime on November 23, 2016 at 15:23:04
Thanks for the reply, airtime. I will consider a passive vc. Years ago I tried a Luminous Audio passive with my 320BEE; while I gained smoothness, detail and resolution I lost too much scale and "meat on the bones".
Thanks for you thoughts on the 275BEE. Your comments about how it handles complex music mirrors what reviewers have noted and it's great to hear that from an end user.
I look forward to putting the 275BEE in my system.
Cheers,
Scott
Follow Ups:
I also tried using passives with the smaller integrated amps like the 326 and found the same thing. Kind of hollow sounding. That is NOT true with the C275BE
The C275 is a great amp with a kind of sweetness to it. Not in a vintage amp way by being overly warm and fuzzy. It maintains a high degree of detail while still being easy and non fatiguing. I've had a few new amps and they went from detail to edgy REAL quick.
I like when I'm listening to a full orchestral piece and you can hear all the detail and separation. An it does it with "no fuss". Do try the passive first.
If you want to get an idea of how the 165 sounds just use your 320s preamp section. It is an older model but you may get an idea. the 165 IS the same preamp that is in the newer line like the 326.
I had a 275bee for a short time, sounded nice but build quality was poor.
Started loosing one channel after playing for 10min. Sent it back.
AB
I've had mine for 3 or 4 years and never a problem. NAD did have a previous history of some SERIOUS QC problems. But they did what a responsible company should do. They went over to China and started enforcing their OWN QC
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: