Nad

[RAZOR]

Looking for any reviews from owners of the NAD C162 Preamp and the C272 Power Amp.
Please give the good and down sides in your review. Thanks:

[BRANDONH]

Looking for any reviews from owners of the NAD C162 Preamp and the C272 Power Amp.
Please give the good and down sides in your review. Thanks:

This is old but still..I am also looking for a review on the NAD C162 (Only)
Have the amplifiers I need already.
I have seen 2 on the 162 and several on the C160 wonder what the difference is between the two?

[BRANDONH]

Decided to take the plunge without any feedback.

The unit will be here today and plan to post my review in a couple of weeks.

http://nadelectronics.com/img/resampled/060615161402-1200-C162_3_4.jpg
http://nadelectronics.com/img/resampled/060615161824-1200-C162_rear.jpg
http://nadelectronics.com/products/hifi-amplifiers/C162-Stereo-Preamplifier


The review will include how the unit preforms with a MM Cartridge and a MC Cart which will be in Monday 30-Jul-07.

This will be my first MC so I am excited to hear how it preforms.

Audio-Technica AT-OC9ML/II
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/resource_library/product_images/7192829555c2a107/large/at_oc9ml_ii.jpg
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/cartridges/8e67b15a2a48de4e/index.html

[Feanor]

Decided to take the plunge without any feedback.

The unit will be here today and plan to post my review in a couple of weeks.
http://nadelectronics.com/img/resampled/060615161824-1200-C162_rear.jpg
http://nadelectronics.com/products/hifi-amplifiers/C162-Stereo-Preamplifier
...


I think you will be well served by the NAD. Of course, it's really nice that I has the built-in phono preamp. Also, I like the variable output connections: this has the potential to make bi-amp balancing a lot easier.

[BRANDONH]

I think you will be well served by the NAD. Of course, it's really nice that I has the built-in phono preamp. Also, I like the variable output connections: this has the potential to make bi-amp balancing a lot easier.

Well I hope so.
Like any system you never know till you hear it in your home.
But from what I have read which is not a lot, it sounds like what I am looking for.
Which is a simple quality (probably not audiophile) preamp that I can use for two channel play back.
I will keep the Pioneer Elite for the HT system and have added an auto detect switcher so I can still use the same amplifiers for both.
The Elite has a built-in phono stage but it is only a Moving Magnet and IMO not really all that good for Stereo only...although very good 7.1 surround sound.

I have always wanted to do something like this for stereo listening and I like that the NAD has a moving coil input also something I wanted to tryout.

With the NAD & Audio-Technica I am not out a lot of money in this venture.

Hope not to be dissapointed.

[BRANDONH]

I will keep this short.

After having it for a week now I can say this pre is a real bargain!
I am surprised it is not mentioned much in the audiophile world (probably because it does not cost a lot IDK)
But Audiophile it is in spades, very clear and clan highs with well defined midrange section good control over the bass tight and definite.

The MM portion of this Pre is very good but its the MC that really wakes the system up.
Worth the money?
you bet, and really a good deal HERE (http://www.spearitsound.com/nad/C162.asp)

[nightflier]

OK, I hope no one shoots me for asking this, but can anyone tell me how it compares to the NAD C320BEE (when configured as a preamp)?

[PeruvianSkies]

OK, I hope no one shoots me for asking this, but can anyone tell me how it compares to the NAD C320BEE (when configured as a preamp)?

If you do get shot...hopefully it won't be in the nads. lol.

[Feanor]

Looking for any reviews from owners of the NAD C162 Preamp and the C272 Power Amp.
Please give the good and down sides in your review. Thanks:

Razor,

Since you're asking, I owned a C270, the immediate predeceasor of the C272 and reputedly very similar. I drove it with my Apt Holman preamp, in turn it drove Magneplanar MMG's.

The C270 was a significant improvement over my old Phase Linear 400: less shape and more transparent, slightly warm instead of bright. I was fairly impressed. However when I compared the NAD with a Bel Canto eVo and with at pair of Monarchy SM-70 Pro's (which I now use), I realized that the NAD had seriously over-warm, flabby bass, and was much less resolving and transparent than either of these alternatives.

Now, the Bel Canto was about 4x the cost of the NAD, so it's hardly a fair comparison. The Monarchy pair, on the other hand, can be had new for under $1k, and is, IMO, a hugely better value (although it is slightly less powerful).

I also owned an Adcom GFA 555II for a while; I bought it used for US$305; (they usually go around $400 on eBay). This unit was better sounding than the NAD, particularly the bass, which was strong and tight compared to the NAD C270.

I also have a vintage NAD receiver, 7130, for which I paid $105 about a year ago. It has proven reliable and was good value.