The only reason I have ever heard of NAD is because my father gave me a receiver (my first) about ten years ago (I think). Other than that the only time I have ever heard of it is on this website. I purchased another one about a week ago and the thing is awesome.
My question is: for such a great receiver that apparently everyone on here knows about why have I never seen nor have I heard about it more often. The closest dealer to me is over four hours away and they keep nothing in stock it has to be ordered. I had to get mine off an internet dealer (Saturday Audio - and I got a sweet deal by the way).
Am I just living in a vaccuum? Why do I only hear about Pioneer, Yamaha, Sony, Onkyo, and a little less often about Denon and HK?
For such an awesome receiver (that blows away my old Onkyo)how come it is such a secret?
AdamT
Posted on
I think fewer people know about it because NAD isn't sold through mass chains like CC and Best Buy. Your average guy on the street probably hasn't heard of Rotel, Sunfire, or Outlaw either, but they're all great makes.
That said, NAD does seem to have a pretty small network of distributors. I live in Miami--not a small city--and the closest dealer to me is almost 30 miles away. I called them to get their price on the NAD T752 and the guy who answered told me they don't give prices on NAD equipment over the phone. I said "fine" and ordered from Saturday Audio. Like I'm going to spend two hours in the car just to find out the friggin price!
Hawk
Posted on
fan:
From what I have been able to gather, NAD was owned for a long time by a Swedish conglomerate, who more or less let the brand wither from lack of support. This is why its dealer network is in such disarray. Two years ago, or perhaps three, it was purchased by Lenbrook Group, a Canadian firm, which also owns PSB and a few other small brands. Lenbrook has infused NAD with a lot of new research dollars and a direction it hadn't had before. In essence, it is getting back to its roots, a company that tries to give the consumer the best bang for the buck. I view it as a welcome change. However, you will never see NAD as one of the big companies as they still have a very small advertising budget. They still rely on dealer recommendations and word of mouth.
G-Man
Posted on
Jeez--I have owned a NAD from over 2 decades ago. Long since given it away though.
I see NAD advertisements in all the major hi-fi mags--you just don't see them sold in major retailers. They sell mostly in audio salon dealerships, but there are exceptions.
NAD believes in protecting its local dealers, like Paradigm, and a number of other companies. Has less to do with quality (although both are quality products) and more to do with marketting strategy.
NAD realizes it would get lost in major retail outlets like Circuit City and Best Buy, but it would be among only a few in audio salons--like Arcam and Rotel. But NAD has made its way into online sellers at greatly reduced prices and from what I have heard--this has made the locally "protected" dealerships quite irate. NAD is wondering how to iron this out--as they don't want to alienate the stores that physically showcase their product--but then these consumers go online and purchase it cheaper. Oh well.
another reason you dont see NAD, HK, Denon, and others as much as Sony, Yamaha, Kenwood etc., is because they dont have 20 different junk recievers under $300 for the retailers to flood their displays with for goofs too walk in and go WOW WHAT A DEAL!!
Hawk
Posted on
Say:
Great point!
Lem
Posted on
Then there is the marketing strategy that goes after those other goofs who place more value on the past reputations of a brand although the current lines have numerous quality issues.
Come on guys, these are all mass manufactured units with the NAD being closer to hand built.
I find it amusing that companies like Denon can offer so many features and internal components with fancy names like SHARC, etc and still not sound as good as a $500 Kenwood or Pioneer Elite.
So many tout being future proof. How many actually come through with upgrades? If they ever get around to an upgrade it is at an unreasonalbe price and the unit is already two generations behind.
No high end stores that I know of sell HK and a few offer Denon so that those who can not afford high end can still buy there and feel good that they did not go to CC or BB.
tellthetruth
Posted on
This is getting goofy. NAD is hand built? Plaezzzze! Its built in China, the rock bottom, low wage capital of the globe. Its "hand built" at a factory churning out build to spec hardware for many companies.
What a crock. NAD may make a great product, better even than those built by B&K in America. But lets not get carried away with the glories of mass production in a country of rock bottom wages.
Hawkson
Posted on
the reviews i have read(not the one Hawk is pushing (742)) on 2 different occasions listed the NAD reciever as not so good
maybe they have a couple good products here and there, but the whole line might not be great
John A.
Posted on
I come from a former manufacturing area which a number of Japanese companies now use as a low-wage point of assembly for European distribution. This would have been thought impossible before about 1970. It is possible, thellthetruth, that by 2050 the boot will be on the other foot. Stick around and see. Low wages does not mean unskilled assembly. It means productivity. That mean growth. Massive salaries in the West often go to idiots who cannot tie their own shoe laces.
Oh, yes, "hand-built". That means many man-hours for construction. Pay people by the hour, and then ask where you expect affordable hand-built things to come from. If Bill Gates did embroidary or weaved baskets, they would probably not retail at attractive prices. The move of Western and Japanese electronics companies to China for assembly has taken place for sound economic reasons. There is no evidence that it has resulted in poor quality, and may well have had the opposite effect.
Hawk
Posted on
Hawkson:
I suggest NADs because all of the receivers in its line sound better than the competition without reservation, IMHO. I have a Denon 3803 and it is embarrassed by the NAD 742, which costs half as much. When you read a critical review of an NAD receiver, the nit-picks are always about the lack of features. No, it doesn't have 42 different "soundfields" (Yamaha) and it doesn't have video up-conversion (Denon), or any other of the many electronics tricks that the electrical engineers can devise. But what NAD has more than any other brand is a very clear, warm, realistic sound that one can enjoy listening to for many hours. I can't say that about many receivers out there and I have spent a lot of hours listening to every brand to find out for myself.
I am in the process of pulling some cash together to get an NAD to replace my Denon as soon as I can. I want the 752, but I will settle for a 742 if I have to, or if some extra money comes in, I may even go for the 762. It doesn't matter as each of the NADs sound like quality separates rather than a receiver. The whole line is extremely good if sound quality is what counts for you. As it is the only thing that matters to me, I will endorse any of the NADs.
Rather than read reviews, which are always colored by the advertising dollars spent, listen for yourself and I think you will agree with me.
Joel
Posted on
>
Sheez - NAD should send you a 762 for free considering all the receivers you sold for them here.
I bumped into a guy that worked at an audio mag and he said they'd never publish a bad review for an advertiser. If it was a horrible product they'd skip publishing it at all... but they'd never dis an advertiser.
That's the real state of the union.
Joel
John A.
Posted on
Lem, again,
"those other goofs who place more value on the past reputations of a brand although the current lines have numerous quality issues"
Difficult to know where you draw the line between past and current. Reputation counts for something. Current experience is fragmented, unreliable, and becomes reputation when it begins to hang together. Maybe this forum eases the transition.
Re advertising, part of the Rega legend is that they have never advertised. Ever. Anywhere. So their consistently good reviews cannot be written off as quid pro quo from magazine publishers. Mind you, I have just read a review of Bose speakers in November HiFi News. Whether it is a good or bad review depends on what you want from speakers. I should think the average HFN reader wouldn't go near them after reading it, but it takes all sorts.
Like I'm going to spend two hours in the car just to find out the friggin price!