I know audio isn't usually discussed here, but I just bought a Nad
C340 amp on Ebay and I wondered if anyone was familiar with this amp
and what they thought of it. It seems to have had a mixed reaction.
What Hi Fi named it their Product Of The Year 1999 but Hi fi Choice
were less enthusiastic, and AudioReview is a strange mix of for and
against (4.54/5). I know it's a bit downmarket for most RAO posters,
but I just thought, you know....

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
I know audio isn't usually discussed here, but I just bought a Nad
C340 amp on Ebay and I wondered if anyone was familiar with this amp
and what they thought of it. It seems to have had a mixed reaction.
What Hi Fi named it their Product Of The Year 1999 but Hi fi Choice
were less enthusiastic, and AudioReview is a strange mix of for and
against (4.54/5). I know it's a bit downmarket for most RAO posters,
but I just thought, you know....

Not that specific model, but IME NADs sound a little dark.
Their little receivers are the standouts, in the sense that they surprise
for the money.
But the more expensive NADs tend more to disappoint than surprise.
Then there's the reliability question, which has dogged NAD for a long time.

In article ,
(paul packer) wrote:

I know audio isn't usually discussed here, but I just bought a Nad
C340 amp on Ebay and I wondered if anyone was familiar with this amp
and what they thought of it. It seems to have had a mixed reaction.
What Hi Fi named it their Product Of The Year 1999 but Hi fi Choice
were less enthusiastic, and AudioReview is a strange mix of for and
against (4.54/5). I know it's a bit downmarket for most RAO posters,
but I just thought, you know....

I use one for my Quads. No complaints, other than a sticky remote. I
bought it for a second system but after putting it in the main system as
a temporary measure, I haven't found a reason to change, aside from a
recent covetous glance at a used ARC VT 60.

The current 320BEE is probably a better value new. Don't worry about
reliability. If it works now, it'll probably keep working.

Stephen

MINe 109 said:

The current 320BEE is probably a better value new. Don't worry about
reliability. If it works now, it'll probably keep working.

Just put it on the bench, resolder everything and you'll be fine.

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

Just put it on the bench, resolder everything and you'll be fine.

Not very helpful, Sander. Is that it?

(paul packer) said:

Just put it on the bench, resolder everything and you'll be fine.

Not very helpful, Sander. Is that it?

The many NADs I've encountered, nearly all suffered from bad
soldering.
You can avoid future failures by resoldering the PCB.

Standard practice for me with every repair I get.

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

The many NADs I've encountered, nearly all suffered from bad
soldering.
You can avoid future failures by resoldering the PCB.

Standard practice for me with every repair I get.

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."


It's often interesting reading AudioReview in that posters (usually
American) often complain of recurring faults that we in Oz have never
encountered. Further reading reveals that US units are often assembled
in a different country (in some cases Mexico) than Oz units. I don't
say that's the case here, but I know there isn't a direct corrolation.
This particular unit is assembled in Malaysia.

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
(paul packer) said:

It's often interesting reading AudioReview in that posters (usually
American) often complain of recurring faults that we in Oz have never
encountered. Further reading reveals that US units are often assembled
in a different country (in some cases Mexico) than Oz units. I don't
say that's the case here, but I know there isn't a direct corrolation.
This particular unit is assembled in Malaysia.

I'm from Europe, the units sold here are probably also made in
Malaysia, Taiwan or S-Korea.

Same here. My little power-envelope NAD receiver was made in the far east.

Sander deWaal wrote:

The many NADs I've encountered, nearly all suffered from bad
soldering.

I've never liked NAD components. Apart from the decidedly yawnsville
aesthetics, I've seen far too many faulty ones. Plus the buttons they
use (at least on older units) are utter crap and fall off.

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 21:07:59 +0100, Paul Dormer
wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:

The many NADs I've encountered, nearly all suffered from bad
soldering.

I've never liked NAD components. Apart from the decidedly yawnsville
aesthetics, I've seen far too many faulty ones. Plus the buttons they
use (at least on older units) are utter crap and fall off.

This all sounds like Doomsday. Does no one have any good news?

In article ,
(paul packer) wrote:

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 21:07:59 +0100, Paul Dormer
wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:

The many NADs I've encountered, nearly all suffered from bad
soldering.

I've never liked NAD components. Apart from the decidedly yawnsville
aesthetics, I've seen far too many faulty ones. Plus the buttons they
use (at least on older units) are utter crap and fall off.

This all sounds like Doomsday. Does no one have any good news?

Well, I did respond directly and positively. My 340 still has all its
buttons.

You might look at the NAD website. There's an implication that the 340
uses a different circuit than earlier amps.

Stephen

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 21:07:59 +0100, Paul Dormer
wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:

The many NADs I've encountered, nearly all suffered from bad
soldering.

I've never liked NAD components. Apart from the decidedly yawnsville
aesthetics, I've seen far too many faulty ones. Plus the buttons they
use (at least on older units) are utter crap and fall off.

This all sounds like Doomsday. Does no one have any good news?

Mine still works .