I presently own a NAD C372 playing through Paradigm Studio 20 V3's. I am happy with the overall sound, however, always looking for improvement, I am considering purchasing a NAD C162 to pair with the C372 as I have heard that the seperate is far better than the integrate. Does anyone have an oppinion whether the C162 would add value to the sound and how?
I am not sure that there would be any audible improvement. I think if you want improvement in the sound of your system, I would recommend that you look into your source player.
Thanks for the reply Hawk. I was always under the impression seperating the pre from the power would result in a smoother more dynamic sound. Do you think a different pre would make a diiference? As far as my source, my CDR is a Arcam Alpha 5+. Old but smooth.
rickc, I bet that hawk is touting the 372's abilities. The pre section of that integrated is very good, likely the equal of the 162. You might investigate the Nad power amp to seperate the 2 units. I bet the Paradigm's would love it.
rick, Hawk is the Nad guy here, but to my understanding, yes. Your 372 preamp is the equal of not only the 162, but many others as well. The 272 power amp might be a more appropriate move, and that power amp is very, very good.
A post now lost had a listener with a 320BEE who wanted to upgrade the pre section, but keep the 320 power. He had a 372 available, and got that as his pre. Very good combo(for him). I would prefer the power of the 272, but thats just me.
I doubt that you will find the performance, phono and versatility of the 372 without laying out more bucks.
A sidestep would be Rotel, but thats a different house sound. No, you might be best to seek a 272 power amp.
nuck, thanks again for the reply. I have a Rotel in a seperate room so I am familiar with the sound. The warmth of the Nad is what suits the room it is in. I would not want to change that aspect of the sound. I am very happy with the 372 which is about 1 year old. I guess I am stuck in that loop of trying to improve the sound.
The V3's are an excellent speaker which I have had for a couple of years. I have not had a chance to hear the V4's have you? I am familiar with the V2's and if the improvements to the V4's are anything like the improvement of the V3's over the V2's then they should be a great speaker. Not knocking the V2's. They are a good sounding speaker but fall short of the V3's IMHO.
I do not have a sub as the room is app. 15X11. I find that the lows are remarkably well defined and crisp, agaian in IMHO.
You might want to search for what you are lacking. If you listen hard, you might find that you are lacking nothing. Dude, sometimes the perfect set is just that. Perfect.
Hi to all In the last 20 years I had NAD 7020 receiver, NAD 7000 receiver, NAD C350 integrated, and now I use NAD C160 C270 combo. I liked very much the first NAD 7020 (3020 with tuner) and the NAD 7000 Monitor receiver. I liked less the NAD C350 integrated although it had high power The NAD C160 C270 combo is a big step upward. It is far better than all the NAD amplifiers and receiver I mentioned and much more refined and accurate from NAD C350. Unfortunately I did not have the NAD C370 or C372 I have now for some experiments ROTEL 03 pre and it has a different sound. Nad is more warm, ROTEL is more analytical.
Since I am able to post again! I will add my $0.02 worth.
I am not highly experienced with NAD equipment, but have auditioned the C162/C272 many times. This combo is exceptional for the price and is very good in it's own right also.
I don't know how the C162 compares to the line stage of the integrated amps. But there is one scenario where the C162 will be head and shoulders above the integrated, and that is if you are using a turntable with the phono stage in the C162.
It will be much better for the phono stage to have stable and clean power in a stand alone pre-amp. I have heard the C162 phono stage with a number of Rega TT's and can vouch for the fact that it is an excellent phono stage.
Otherwise (almost invariably) I concur with Hawk, for CD usage I don't think adding a C162 to an existing NAD integrated will do much for the sound. It would be much better to PX the integrated for a full C162/C272 pre/pwr combo.
Hi Ish. It has always been advised as taboo to mix Rotel with Nad, for a number of reasons. None of those reasons matter, however, if you like it. Maybe check the sensitivity between the Rotel's output and the Nad input, though. If you like the result you may wish to optimize the gain.
I did not do this mixing willingly. It happened that my NAD C160 needed some repair and my dealer was very kind to let me another pre, the ROTEL RC -03 for a while. To my surprise the ROTEL pre RC- 03 integrated very smoothly with my all NAD system. I have the ROTEL pre for about 10 days now but I will return it soon, I hope, after I will get my NAD pre fixed. It was a chance to compare the sound although it is still NAD power amplifier in my system. I found the ROTEL pre to be more accurate, more detailed, even more analytical. On the other side NAD pre is warmer and richer. I listen mainly to classical music and I think that the ROTEL sound has some good points in this sort of music, but I have no intentions to change my C160 NAD pre. The difference is not that big. It is also very convenient to use only one remote for all the system If one day I will find some McIntosh or Conard --Johnson Art pre on sale I will think it over again. My system NAD C160 pre NAD C270 power NAD C542 CD Player NAD C422 tuner SONUS FABER CONCERTINO`S speakers
Ish, that's a good chance to try something else on the fly. excellent! My findings and descriptions agree with yours 100%. I still run the Rotel 1072 largely, my transport ia a Classe, closer to the Nad than the Rotel, but signature, and I use that one for chosen pieces, depending on the mood. Thanks for sharing that.
I am quite happy with my CD player NAD C542. Prior to the C542 I had NAD C541 which is almost the same. I also had MARANTZ 63SE that I did not like too much, more in the treble zone. I also tried the operate my computer as a source and I have TOSHIBA DVD ROM and SOUND BLASTER EXTIGY external sound card, but up to now the computer proved to be an inferior source when compared to CD player. I use the computer to DVD watching, editing, ripping, ect. In the past I used to watch and sometimes to take part in the thread "Teaching old dogs new tricks". I even received warm recommendations for the NAD C160 C270 combo from MR but this thread had ups and downs and now I concentrate in some local forums.
Now I look for a new shelve or monitor small speaker to replace my SONUS FABER CONCERTINO`s. My present listening room is relatively small and I think that I do not need floor standers speakers. It is not easy to find small speakers that will outperform the CONCERTINO`s in sound and will have a marvelous style like the CONCERTINO`S to survive my WAF test. Do you have recommendations?