|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.181.17.212
In Reply to: RE: Midrange makers are discovering that ... posted by Feanor on January 18, 2021 at 04:26:10
I'm impressed by the way NAD embraced, and then improved upon, switch mode amplifier technology. Their Masters-series amps continue to set a high performance bar and now their C-series is offered at more affordable pricing.
Tom
Follow Ups:
I agree completely. I note you have the NAD M22. You should get a home demo of the M33. Its Purifi amp module is 2 generations (after DirectDigital) up from the one in the M22. And it now does so much more than the very capably M32 including built-in streamer and Dirac Live room correction if you think you need that. I've done the measurements and the filter it offers certainly irons out the response but I think it takes away some life from the music - as do all 4 of the RC systems I've tried. I generally stick with no filter.
I'm perfectly happy with the M22. I don't hear the ultra-high frequency harmonics (noise) that some people complain about. To me the M22 is about as clean as I've heard at any stereo shop. When I auditioned the amp I had the dealer put several combinations of preamp, amp, and speakers together so I could get a sense of the M22's "flavor". It's pretty plain; I could immediately hear differences in preamps and speakers that were combined but when compared to other power amps the M22 didn't reveal itself other than being able to cleanly drive a whole range of speakers, from big Maggie's to stand-mount Totem's. I'm now using it with a solid-state preamp in passive mode. I use a tube buffer stage to throw in a bit of bloom. :-)
I didn't care for the M12 preamp, though. Too clinical for my tastes.
Interesting what you say about the M12. This was the first NAD I've owned and I still have it. During my long search for a really good amp to match my Avantgarde speakers (I had Unos at the time, Duo XDs now), I used the M12 in front of the power amps but not with the integrateds I tested.I've generally tied to avoid having preamps at all. For years I used a Mark Levinson 390S CD player as my preamp as it had an analogue volume control and 2 Aux digital inputs, used for my DAB tuner. Since then I've used integrateds as they offer better value - no duplication of cases, power supplies and need no cables - my pet hate.
A fellow Avantgarde owner (with Trios) bought an M22 after owning many very costly amps and raved about it. Then he bought a Benchmark AHB-2 and raved even more over that. This prompted me to buy the Benchmark, but it turned out to be drearily dull, so I returned it in exchange for a Gamut D200 Mk III - a MUCH better amp, though it had its faults. I've concluded that the Trio owner was obsessed with utter silence and the Benchmark is probably the quietest amp on the market, with the M22 probably a close second!
Anyway, I'm sure the M22 is still a great amp.
Edits: 01/19/21
Clinical was the general term that came to mind while auditioning preamps/amps. It's defined as "Sound that is pristinely clean but wholly uninvolving" in J. Gordon Holt's "Sounds Like? An Audio Glossary". (Link below.) The M12 just didn't sound natural to me, at least not compared to listening to music in the real world. Clinical is great when the material is great but I like being able to listen to run-of-the-mill source material without wincing at its warts.
From: Sounds Like? An Audio Glossary
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: