|
New member Username: AsimovHabra, West Bengal India Post Number: 1 Registered: May-05 | I'm going to upgrade my NAD c350 with pre-power setup. I've two option: Rotel RC 1070 & RB 1070 vs NAD c162 & NAD c272 for my B&W DM 602 s3 speaker. Is there anybody who compared NAD & ROTEL pre-power. I've no scope to listen both, I'll get the amp after confirming the order. so your advice is very much valuable to me. Please share your exprience. |
|
Silver Member Username: Sun_kingLeeds, West Yorkshire UK Post Number: 239 Registered: Mar-04 | The Rotel will give you a more forward sound, big on treble and big on bass. I find the Rotel sound a bit too fatiguing. Depends whether you liked the sound of your C350 or not? The C162/C272 will give you more of the same but with a much better bottom end. The Nad will give you the familiar warmth and easy listening experience that you're used to but with a defined midrange and fast, tight bass. They really are chalk and cheese and you could do with listening to them before you make your mind up. If that's out of the question then I'd stick with Nad as you're used to the presentation that their kit gives. Rotel will be a BIG change, one you may very well like but also one which has the potential to not be to your liking. |
|
Unregistered guest | I have recently purchased an NAD C372, based purely on perceived reputation and promos. i am bitterly disappointed at the bass response from this unit, to the point that it is almost indistinguishable at times.The little reading I have done would suggest that the C162/C272 combination would have been a better option. Does anyone have a comment regarding the bass response of the C372 and on my comments regarding the combination the combination. Thanks |
|
Silver Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 467 Registered: Feb-05 | I have the C162 but not with the C272 but instead with a Hafler 9505 amp which I bought used for $550 (they are often available on the used market for $500-$700). I am also using an NAD CD player and the bass is outstanding. I personally have never heard any complaints except the one above about the bass from an NAD integrated. Rotel has a thicker or denser sound than NAD. I don't find it particularly tiresome. It just doesn't seem as accurate to my ears, but only by a tad. Rotels strengths are detail and soundstage depth. Honestly, when I switched from Rotel to NAD last year I found that some of my music sounded better and some not as good but in the end more sounded better than not. |
|
Silver Member Username: Sun_kingLeeds, West Yorkshire UK Post Number: 245 Registered: Mar-04 | As previously noted by me some months ago, I found the C372 bass a bit lacking. It's a shame because other than that the amp gave me EXACTLY what I was looking for. I now have the C160 & C270 pre & power combo and the bass is a lot better. I wouldn't have thought there would have been a night & day difference between the C162/C272 and the C372 though. Splitting the pre & power doesn't make dramatic differences. The C370 had better bass than the C372 so I went for the pre & power version of that amp. Unbridled, a member of this forum is using the C272 power amp with a non-Nad pre amp however and reports great results. |
|
Silver Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 472 Registered: Feb-05 | Bottom line the integrated ain't as good as the seperates. I was at my favorite audio store the other day test driving an Era Sub and listening to a Rotel integrated with Studio 40's and the bass sans the sub was amazingly good. Just a thought. |
|
New member Username: AsimovPost Number: 2 Registered: May-05 | Thanks every body. Before changing my amp i want to upgrade my CD player, it'a NAD 5325, a very old model but far better than my sony DVD player. My problem is I'm not getting good bass response, in some cds it's very boomy ( Mark Knofler's Golden Heart - Track 9 & 11, Pink Floyd's division Bell - Track 2, Medwyn goodwall - Rhythm of the Ancients - track # 2 & 3). I'm not sure how to resolve this boom effect. I've tried several option with speaker placement.My room is 3.35m x 4.27m - it's a very small room. First I decided to change the weekest link in my setup, I've almost decided to buy a NAD c542 CD player but before ordering it I need your opinion. NAD c541i got so many favouable reviews and awarded top of the list from a group test, it has the same specification as c542, same DAC- 24 bit burr-brown sigma-delta with HDCD decoding, wondering why they change the model. Sometimes upgrade won't workwell as with NAD c270 & c272. Till now I failed to collect any review of NAd C542 from professional reviewer except a group test of What Hifi pl. check this link https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/136834.html they recomended Azur c640 and Arcam 73T. I am cofused as they mentioned NAD 542's DAC 20 bit instead 24 bit and gave 4 star in build and features. Anyway I have read the thread of Azur c640 and c542, but not sure which player will best matched to achieve a tight and detailed bass without boominess and a very detailed and sweet highs for NAD C350 and B&W 602 s3 setup.i don't need big bass. |
|
Silver Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 478 Registered: Feb-05 | I own the NAD C542 and the upgrade from the C541i was not a bad thing. It sounds wonderful and in my opinion better than the comparable Rotel and Cambridge units. My nod would go to the NAD. But you should audition each of them keeping in mind the conditions of the audition. |
|
Silver Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 480 Registered: Feb-05 | I'm sorry if my post made it look as though I owned the C541i because I didn't, but I did hear it. I did however own a Rotel RCD971 which I enjoyed for quite awhile. Then I had it modified at Northwest Audio Labs and enjoyed it some more. But when my friend who owns Northwest Audio Labs and does the mods replaced his 5 yr old 8k DAC and transport with the NAD C542 it got my attention. I replaced my Rotel and haven't looked back. My ex wife is now happlily enjoying the RCD971. |
|
New member Username: HoraceBucaramanga, Santander Colombia Post Number: 1 Registered: Jul-05 | I have a Nad c162 preamplifier with Rotel Rb1070 amplifier. Any comments about this combo?? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1073 Registered: Feb-05 | Does it sound good? If it does, what does it matter what we think? I have the C162 pre with a Hafler 9505...sounds fabulous. I replaced a Rotel RB981 with the Hafler. For me the NAD/Rotel combo didn't work. Primarily because the Rotel amps have a narrow bandwidth. The Hafler is a perfect match for the NAD....wide bandwidth, high slew rate, incredible power, and tight well controlled bass. |
|
New member Username: HoraceBucaramanga, Santander Colombia Post Number: 2 Registered: Jul-05 | well, I think it sound not bad at all, but I've noticed a little emphasis in high frecuencies. For that reason I'm looking for a new amp or new pre for my speakers energy c5. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1075 Registered: Feb-05 | That was my problem with it Horacio. The highs were too bright. My Hafler solved that problem. Your pre is not the problem. You can find great pre owned amps at Audiogon. I bought mine from a friend. |
|
Silver Member Username: W00bPost Number: 145 Registered: Mar-05 | just a small and maybe (lazy?) suggestion.. if you are lacking bass response, why don't you buy an equalizer and bump up the lower ends? i have a system that sounds absolutely FLAT, even with everything maxed on the bass and treble.. its hard to get good results.. i hooked it up to an equalizer and it sounds absolutely wonderful to my ears.. big lows, low mid, big highs |
|
Silver Member Username: DanmanQUEBEC CANADA Post Number: 375 Registered: Apr-04 | I would suggest that you get a good sub before an equilizer unless it is of very good quality as it will add noise to your system and will exagerate certain tone qualities. I own 2 272's with the 162 in bridged mode and bass is far from the problem! This system sounded a lot better than the YBA Initial series that woud of costs me 2000$ more. I brought it home and noticed it was underpowered and seemed quite flat as you all say. I also previously owned a 372 and never noticed any bass problems as well. Maybe the 370 was more pronounced in the mid-bass area but I never tried one so I can't be certain. |