|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
220.246.78.16
i was reading at 10audio.com a very highly rated review of a NAD pre-amp (at $1,000 a pop) and wondered if any brand is consistently better in the mid-fi range though i'd admit that $1,000 is for me $500 more than what mid-fi 'should be all about'.
Thanks for interest.
H.F.N.
Follow Ups:
Good sound doesn't have to cost a fortune, and paying a fortune is absolutely no guarantee of good sound either! Don't be misled by these snob terms.
I find NAD equipment in many instances to be very good value: great sound for less money. Not all, mind you, but I do shop those carefully and I"m quite satisfied.
I'm using an older C740 integrated receiver, which has never failed me, and now use a 542 CDP, which sounds great. I did add an outboard DAC, which improved on the CDP, but not so much that I wouldn't recommend the raw unit to others without reservation.
These are older models and certainly nowhere near the cost nor the purported quality of NAD's high end now. Those are very well reviewed.
Don't let people or magazines bully you into thinking it's solely a matter of your budget. That's bullshit!
"Good sound doesn't have to cost a fortune, and paying a fortune is absolutely no guarantee of good sound either! Don't be misled by these snob terms."
All too true!
I just can't, at my tender age, really switch my thinking to the notion that "Hi/Mid/Low-Fi refers to the price rather than the performance. Now the phrase "high-end" does work for me, I think it means costly gear regardless of it's performance. When they get convoluted reason is lost and for many it degenerates to being all about money. Money is simply the LCD amoungst humans and more is good. You can recognize those that have succumbed most easily by their call. It goes: "You get what you pay for." Other field marks include lusting after "designer" products and substituting "expert" judgements for their own.
Oddly enough the syndrome doesn't seem to be particularly correlated with how much wealth the specimen actually possess, it's apparently driven by something deeper...
Of course if one is indeed buying a Stereo, Car, Wife or House to impress others or bolster a sagging libedo then expense really is the right parameter to maximize.
Philosopher Rick
"Of course if one is indeed buying a Stereo, Car, Wife or House to impress others or bolster a sagging libedo then expense really is the right parameter to maximize.
Philosopher Rick"
That's as funny as it is untrue.
Check out Bada Audio - mid-fi price - Top level sound quality. And built like a tank. Great integrateds!
Amen on the $500 vs $1000 midfi. To me the top end for a midfi integrated or receiver would be $500. Don't think I would go $1000 on a NAD pre. I just don't like the NAD house sound that much but I do still own a NAD C315BEE integrated that I use for internet streaming listening.Marantz is my go to brand for mid and hi fi. You can spend $500 or $7500 on a piece of Marantz gear. Their 11 and 7 series gear can bump bellys with the best of them.
Edits: 05/01/12
Although worlds apart from the original-Whats not to like about a reciever
with a remote and phono stage,dual sub out, tape out, cool cheesy blue display and $250? Harman Kardon is only a name compared to what it started as, but great big box fauxphile gear. Hooked up with similar inexpensive stuff, a system under 1k. You're not hearing a mc cart for that!
...I have been happy with my $200 Onkyo 2ch receiver from umpteen years ago. Sounds fine if you don't compare it to tubes, and has lasted forever by consumer product standards, with no service whatsoever. For whatever this is worth.
SONY and Marantz were the top CD/DVD brands.
Denon and Panasonic (digital amps) use to rule the receiver niche.
NAD and Rotel were ALWAYS a good alternative though.
Haven't bought in a while, so don't know.
Brit amps are supposed to be nice (Creek, Arcam, Roksan).
*steps on soap box*
I view "Mid Fi" as being a bit of a perjorative term. Nearly every component we are talking about spanks the typical hifi/home theater gear sold in the big box stores! Also someone who spends $1-3k on a system is getting first rate sound, and if they pay attention to setup, acoustics and system matching, it will likely out perform systems multiples of its price from people who don't do that and just whip out a checkbook. Sure more expensive gear *can* sound a lot more nuanced, and will do so - but to imply that humble prices = not hifi is dead wrong.
Whew! I feel better now! ;)
*steps off soap box*
Having said that, I'd list the equipment that is at the lower end of the price range of the hifi ecosystem, I am including only the stuff I have heard in a well done system - and things I feel set up right can make the higher dollar items a bit fearful!
1. Marantz non-Reference series (some are so good it makes you wonder what the fuss is about with their Reference series!)
2. Naim's "i" series (In the UK, only)
3. Peachtree Audio (Skip the iPod dock and save a bundle)
4. Rega (Brio-R, DAC, CDP, Turntables!)
5. Outlaw Audio (Great stereo receiver, good monoblocks!)
6. Belles Audio - Soloist series (OK ... this is at the next level, but they give you a bang for your buck you just don't get at the prices they play at - and if there is a time to push it is for them. You won't need to upgrade for a good long time, if ever!)
Speakers:
1. Magnepan! (MMG to 1.7's - use a beefy amp, though)
2. Rega (Speakers are really good - and affordable!)
3. Usual Suspects: Paradigm, PSB, Focal
4. Unusual pick: Bose 901's. If you set them up like you would a Maggie - they sound really close to them tonally and are less fussy about sound-staging. Read a review on Tone Audio and went to a friend who had them and set them up per the article and it was astonishing to say the least. Not as detailed, but also very easy to listen to!
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad"
I agree on the Marantz. Top notch audio quality at a reasonable price.
Same for the Outlaw stereo receiver. That thing sounds gorgeous if you can get over it's weird faux retro look.
I think Peachtree Audio is OK if you don't need a lot of muscle / power for your speakers. Otherwise, I would rate them a bit on the 'weak' side compared to Marantz or Outlaw. Just my 2-cents.
Totally agree about the PEachtree. I've also found that the Rega needs careful matching as well - both are suited to a decent pair of bookshelf speakers (or high efficiency [i.e. 90dB+] floorstanders). Rega Brio-R sounds dynamite with PSB as their own Rega brand.
I was reading an article on prices from 1975 to now - and was struck that they said a "typical consumer grade" turntable cost the equivalent of $2000 in 2012 dollars (major details were missing like *which* TT, and what was the 1975 price, but is was an interesting assertion none the less)! I suspect that the current batch of lower priced turntables for $300-500 would be equivalent in performance. As would a $300-500 CD Player.
And ... I was remiss in not indicating a great digital source - the OPPO in its various incarnations plays just about anything - though I have yet to hear one - though I am due to a new Blu Ray player one of these days! ;)
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad"
I really like the Outlaw Audio brand, especially their integrated and the M-2200 mono blocks (I have). A really fine value.
(Worshiping at the Universal Music Altar)
Don't buy from Grant Fidelity. I was inquiring about some El34's a few years ago, and he would never tell me if they were matched or not.
Look into Emotiva products. From those who own the product on the Planar Asylum and a couple of people I know that own their amplifiers, they might be my choice for driving my new pair of MMG's. I would say mid-fi if your talking price ....
Hey IE:
Enjoy your new MMGs!!!!!
Take care.....old guy
"...and wondered if any brand is consistently better in the mid-fi range..."
What's mid-fi range?
.
To many mid-fi is synonymous with garbage. What is it to you?
taking lessons from your mentor, now, are we.
learn to ask in the spirit of learning and you'll get an answer in the spirit of exchange.
otherwise, not.
(AND YES I DO HAVE A SPECIFIC ANSWER IN MIND AND IT IS NOT WHAT YOU HAVE PRESUPPOSED).
H.F.N.
"(AND YES I DO HAVE A SPECIFIC ANSWER IN MIND AND IT IS NOT WHAT YOU HAVE PRESUPPOSED)."
I don't believe you but it doesn't matter, I've lost interest.
Here's my take ... generalizing (integrated amps)...
NAD - warmish sound verging on dull
Rotel - brisk/chipper sound
Arcam - similar to Rotel
Roksan - a step up, qualities you'd expect to pay much more for.
(of course all of them venture into dearer stuff, not commenting on that)
Short’s the best position they is. Bullet in the Brain
My only experience with NAD was not a good one.
I bought one of their receivers for $399 and thought it sounded dynamically challenged and rolled off in the treble. I bought it based on it's supposed reputation for being a cut above the mass market brands.
I later bought a $199 Onkyo receiver from a department store that totally blew away that NAD in every area. The cheap Onkyo was significantly better and was 1/2 the price of the NAD.
Since that experience, I have always avoided NAD.
That's my take it on it.
I greatly preferred the Rotel amps at the same prices over NAD. The brightness isn't there like the old models (or it's been tamed much more). Arcam is like Rotel but more expensive - I'd lean Rotel for preamp/integrated and maybe Arcam for CD players.
Cambridge Audio also floats around this price point.
Roksan is a step up but the price steps up as well.
OP - you can always buy used - a number of years ago I picked up a Sugden A48b integrated for $350ish including phono stage. The sound is less hi-fi and more music first oriented. So richer deeper bass - loves tone and timbre and acoustic instruments - not as big a soundstage or airy but I'd be looking at the used market - to me it sounded better than my Rotel Separates or Arcam gear that I owned. I regret selling the Sugden - not because what replaced it wasn't better but that Sugden's don't turn up that often and it would have been great in a second system.
Then again you could also look into tube amps such as the following - might be great
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: