Comparisons: NAD 320bee, Marantz PM7200, H/K 3480

[milaz001]

The title says it all. Any thoughts on this comparison, for a 2-channel system? Speakers are 20+ year old JBLs that are still going strong, sensitivity of 89dB. I like the idea of the integrateds, but like the convenience of a built-in tuner in the H/K stereo receiver.

[RGA]

I was not impressed in the least bit to the 320Bee. IMO it has a serious design flaw that does not purport a proper stereo image. Try and do a ditrect comparison with the 320bee and a similarly priced Rotel RA1. Use the latest Dianna Krall track (this is simply to reproduce what I used it may work on many recordings). The vocal trrack seemed out of phase in that here voice was very readily heard out of both speakers rather than projecting a central stage as it should be...the dealer went through several of the 320bee and has carried and still does caryr NAD (so it's not a slam on NAD) but that particular NAD was designed outside of the regular NAD design team (contracted out).

It sounds off -- but sometimes that can snow buyers or reviewers who spend very little time with it. I like NAD so I'm not attackingt hem the 352 or the 372 are both good in their price ranges.

I avoid receivers - yet to find a good sounding one) at least for sane money.

[milaz001]

Interesting.

I just demoed the 320bee in my listening space for a week and was very impressed with it, particularly its power. It has very nice bass extension, and great slam/heft to it. The imaging problem you wrote about is nowhere to be found.

Now demoing the h/k 3480. I realize that I'm no doing anything close to an A/B comparison, but this thing sounds great. Honestly, I'm not finding much of a difference between it and the NAD.

[Asmo]

I recently replaced my 320BEE with the 352, and am happy with the upgrade with my Studio 40 v3s.

As far as the stereo imaging, I found the 320BEE to have a slight forwardness to it also, I don't know if I'd say its a horrible flaw, it lends itself well to many speakers, but I do enjoy the 352 much better. I would just suggest auditioning the 320BEE it is a great all around amp.

[anamorphic96]

I have listened to these side by side on a switcher. Not the best way but it helped. The differences will not be night and day. Overall the NAD will be smoother and more detailed with more warmth. The NAD will also outperform the HK with tough speaker loads. The HK says it will drive a 4 ohm load but not with any authority or finnese. The HK gets thin and anemic sounding when pushed.

Cheers,
Glenn

[matt39]

A couple of years ago I purchased an HK3375 after auditioning NAD, Rotel and Cambridge Audio. I have never had any reason to second guess my decision. It's performance is solid in every way and the tuner is pretty good too. If you like the 3480 then I think it would be a good buy. You save money, get ample solid power and plenty of connection options including the convenience of a tuner. It should drive your JBL's very well indeed. Hope this helps and good luck.

[milaz001]

Great help all around. I appreciate everyone's input.

I'm going to set up an A/B comparison and will report back.

[milaz001]

Long listening session last night, comparing the NAD and the H/K. When I matched the output levels of the NAD and the H/K, I had a very hard time telling them apart. Both are great amps for the $.

[crow137]

milaz001,
I also had the same dilema as you. in the end I chose NAD. I could go on and on about warmth, detail, etc., but these are up to you to differenciate. Everyone's idea of what sounds good is radically different. Also keep in mind that they will sound different in your home than in the store. Most of the time, the speakers in the store are not set up the best way, especially for bass and imaging. This isn't the dealer's fault, it is because of floor space restraints. Speakers too close or far apart kills imaging, too close or too far from walls negatively influences bass, etc. As far as imaging is concerned, I'm listening to Metallica's S&M right now, and I can't find any weakness in that department. Imaging and everything else we look for in a great sounding system doesn't come from just the amp, it comes from a synergy of all components - amp, source, and speakers. Just because an amp doesn't image well on the floor of store doesn't mean it doesn't image well.
To sum it up, take home whichever you think is the best, and try it for a little while. If you are unhappy, bring it back. All three amps are very good amps, I think anyone who knows a little bit about good sound will be happy with either one.

My gear - NAD c320bee Intergrated Amp NAD 523 CD Changer PSB Image t55 Speakers

[riceforlife]

Long listening session last night, comparing the NAD and the H/K. When I matched the output levels of the NAD and the H/K, I had a very hard time telling them apart. Both are great amps for the $.
Hey Milaz,

I'm trying to make exactly the same decision, between the 320BEE and the HK-3480. Which one did you choose ultimately? Were you ever able to try the C352?

[hermann_giron]

I was not able to listen to the HK, but after some listening to both the Marantz 7200 and the NAD, i chose the NAD.

The power on the Marantz was rated a bit higher, but my speakers are relatively sensitive, so I didnt think I would really need the extra power. I havent needed more volume than I can get from this unit for my ordinary listening situations.

the sound quality and stage seemed better on the NAD, I also found a bit more clarity in the higher frequency ranges (from flutes to cymbals and triangles) and a nice clean deepness in the lower frequencies (bass guitar, conga drums, tuba, oboes, etc.)

I paired it with a NAD c542 CD Player and have been very pleased with the sound and Remote control compatibility. (I am sure anybody on this forum could recommend a much better setup, but I am sure that at this price level you cant get much better sound)

The Marantz did have a few things I liked better than the NAD: 2 speaker outputs (A/B), and a nice Black case not the drab Gunmetal Gray (although i have started to like the color of my NAD unit), and a phono stage (not sure if i remember correctly), but all these were secondary needs.

Hope this helped.

[milaz001]

Well, I chose the H/K 3480 over the NAD 320bee and the Marantz PM7200 after two long evenings of comparisons. These three are more similar than they are different, and anyone who assumes a priori that an integrated amp will outperform a stereo receiver has not demoed the 3480--it's that good.