12yr old NAD Receiver or new

[urkid]

My 12yr old NAD receiver recently broke and I am deciding whether it would be better to fix or buy new. i am thinking of buying something simple and inexpensive - like a Sony (gasp) because it has a low distortion ratio and I dont need all of the other inputs. my house is too small, as are my kids, to set up dolby surround and multiple speakers.

i want this mainly for music not dvds. am i better off getting the NAD fixed or is the sony good enough? Or if I want great sound, but don't need all of the additional inputs - what brand/model should I look to buy?

I would be happy to shell out a few hundred more bucks if I thought I was paying for improved quality and not additional inputs I won't use. what do you think?

[dean_martin]

I had a NAD 7225PE receiver from 1989 or 90 that lost output from one channel a couple of years ago which really put me back into this hobby. Not sure what speakers you have, but if you want good sound with perhaps a little more power you might try a good budget integrated amp like the Cambridge Audio Azur 540A:

http://www.audioadvisor.com/store/productdetail.asp?sku=CAMB540A&product_name=Azur%20540A%20Integrated%20Amplifier

Just before my NAD receiver blew out a channel, I passed it on to my son. Of course he always used the bass boost even at high volumes (he rarely heeds my warnings). We replaced it with the CA 540A. He's had no complaints at all.

If you need a tuner, you can pick up a good one used and save yourself some money. Do a little research on used tuners here: www.fmtunerinfo.com

When I decided to upgrade from the NAD after about 10 years, I discovered that most new integrated amps do not include phono sections or if they do they're available as an option. I also discovered that for sound quality an integrated amp is generally better than a stereo receiver. Besides, the 2 channel receiver is almost extinct. I haven't heard this new one from H/K, but if you have a turntable and would prefer your tuner in the same box, then you might give the 3480 a listen:

http://www.jr.com/JRProductPage.process?Product=3960817

As far as number of inputs, I think you'll find that most of today's stuff (except for the high-end and more esoteric or tube components) has more line-level inputs than you'll ever use.

[natlus]

For what its worth I'm speaking as a card carrying NADophile, complete with a busted 7225 Receiver waiting for its repair. My sense with the old NADS are they will deliver more consistent wattage and "musicality" than any other midpriced and often higher priced receivers now. I think distortion is the least important criteria for the amplifier of either what you keep or get in the future. You should check out some of the old reviews at this site to get a flavor of others experience of NAD receivers, and ebay sale of old NAD receivers usually have high multiple bids. I'm not alone in my enthusiasm.

That said, you obviously need a sense of what's busted with your NAD and how much it will cost, and also if you have any additional requirements of your receiver, ie, TV. Since I know nothing about new receivers, I shut up on that score, though I've heard NAD still makes good equipment. I have a vintage Marantz receiver which makes me happy.

Good luck.

[dean_martin]

For what its worth I'm speaking as a card carrying NADophile, complete with a busted 7225 Receiver waiting for its repair. My sense with the old NADS are they will deliver more consistent wattage and "musicality" than any other midpriced and often higher priced receivers now.

I can't find anyone in my area to even look at my 7225. If you think your repair shop would accept mine by mail/ups, etc., I would appreciate their contact info. I have to agree with you on the "musicality" observation. At moderate levels, my 7225 sounded great - a nice, lush presentation. But, it had trouble with higher volumes and at low volumes (for late-night listening) it seemed to lose some detail. Overall, for a 25wpc receiver, it over achieved. It had a decent tuner, phono preamp section and headphone amp too. Big bang for the buck gear!

My second favorite NAD is the C340 integrated in my bedroom system.

[urkid]

thanks dean, i checked out that HK unit from J&R http://www.jr.com/JRProductPage.process?Product=3960817 and it seems like just what I am looking for, except for the thing is big - 26lbs.

any other suggestion I might want to consider to in the receiver area?

[dean_martin]

any other suggestion I might want to consider to in the receiver area?

Not really. Onkyo makes two TX model stereo receivers, but I don't think I can recommend them. Marantz may still make a stereo receiver. Denon makes 2 or 3 stereo receivers also. Here's one:

http://www.crutchfield.com/S-EeJhPLDY3F9/cgi-bin/ProdView.asp?g=10410&I=033DRA395

The reason I suggested the H/K in my earlier post is that I've read some good things about its power amp section. I don't know much about the Denon.

Personally, I would compare the H/K receiver to an integrated amp (like a NAD, Cambridge Audio or Rotel) and choose the one that sounds best. You can always pick up a tuner if you like the integrated best.

[natlus]

[QUOTE=dean_martin]I can't find anyone in my area to even look at my 7225. If you think your repair shop would accept mine by mail/ups, etc., I would appreciate their contact info. I have to agree with you on the "musicality" observation.

It's funny you ask about repair, because I'm trying to school myself in DIY repair, and in my
grandiosity, I think I've located the problem and may be able to do it. That said, I live in the New York City area, so I'm hopeful(blissfully ignorant?) that I could find somewhere in a pinch. I seem to remember some places on the net that do NAD repair, but I have to search my memory.....

and talk about bang for the buck--I bought that 7225, a NAD CD player that works, and a pair of Celestion 3's(one which needs tweaking) for 30 bucks. Now if only I can it all up and running.