What audio system do you have, or plan on getting?

[Coopmv]

What's in the M2 is class D, or?

I'm using B&O ICEpower myself. ASP and ASX2. The ASX2 sounds simply wonderful.

Not sure.  Did the link I posted mention class D?  I think most digital amps are class D.  No?

[drogulus]

   I'm a big NAD fan....25 years and counting.

   The only way NAD amps could be said to have a sound relates to their high headroom.  So the 20 watt amps like the legendary 3020 could easily deliver 80 watts cleanly for transient peaks. The power supply you need to do this is much smaller and cheaper than one designed to deliver 80 watts continuously. So unlike other low power amps of the day the NADs didn't clip or limit when you turned them up. They always sounded like higher power amps. They also had a "soft clipping" circuit but I turned this off since it reduced the headroom. I think they still have this on their amps.

   I've owned 4 NAD amps: 3020, 3150, 304 and 743 (a 5.1 AV receiver). They all performed superbly.

[Coopmv]

   I'm a big NAD fan....25 years and counting.

   The only way NAD amps could be said to have a sound relates to their high headroom.  So the 20 watt amps like the legendary 3020 could easily deliver 80 watts cleanly for transient peaks. The power supply you need to do this is much smaller and cheaper than one designed to deliver 80 watts continuously. So unlike other low power amps of the day the NADs didn't clip or limit when you turned them up. They always sounded like higher power amps. They also had a "soft clipping" circuit but I turned this off since it reduced the headroom. I think they still have this on their amps.

   I've owned 4 NAD amps: 3020, 3150, 304 and 743 (a 5.1 AV receiver). They all performed superbly.

My 2200 has a +6db dynamic headroom and the 2100 has a +4db DH.  But NAD stopped making amps with "big" dynamic headroom by the early 90's.

[drogulus]

     I think my AV receiver has plenty of headroom. I'll have to check.

    I'm looking at the C355BEE and it does look like they have changed how they rate the amps. They still have plenty of headroom but some of that is included in the power spec. IOW they are claiming more continuous power (which they always could have done since the 3020 was a 27 watt amp continuous into 8 ohms. So while they are now claiming more continuous power the amps will probably behave the same. The 355BEE has a 140 watt peak into 8 ohms, 220 into 4, and 270 into 2 ohms. To me it looks like NAD is still following the same strategy but playing a numbers game. But it also looks like you're right that the really high transient figures of the 3020 are not part of the current line.

    Now I'm look at the bottom of the line C315BEE. They are claiming 40 watts for this thing? But look at the dynamic ratings:

  8 ohms   95W (19.5dBW)
   4 ohms   130W (20.8dBW)
   2 ohms   180W (22.6dBW)

   That looks familiar. This is an updated 3020 with practically the same capability in real terms. What's different? They're calling it a 40 watt amp.

[Coopmv]

    I think my AV receiver has plenty of headroom. I'll have to check.

    I'm looking at the C355BEE and it does look like they have changed how they rate the amps. They still have plenty of headroom but some of that is included in the power spec. IOW they are claiming more continuous power (which they always could have done since the 3020 was a 27 watt amp continuous into 8 ohms. So while they are now claiming more continuous power the amps will probably behave the same. The 355BEE has a 140 watt peak into 8 ohms, 220 into 4, and 270 into 2 ohms. To me it looks like NAD is still following the same strategy but playing a numbers game. But it also looks like you're right that the really high transient figures of the 3020 are not part of the current line.

    Now I'm look at the bottom of the line C315BEE. They are claiming 40 watts for this thing? But look at the dynamic ratings:

  8 ohms   95W (19.5dBW)
   4 ohms   130W (20.8dBW)
   2 ohms   180W (22.6dBW)

   That looks familiar. This is an updated 3020 with practically the same capability in real terms. What's different? They're calling it a 40 watt amp.

The NAD 2200 Power Envelope amp has +6db dynamic headroom.  While the amp is rated at 100 watts/ch continuous power into 8 ohms, it pumps out 400 watts/ch at peak into 8 ohms, I believe.

[drogulus]

     Yes, all of my '80s NADs were like that. I think they figured out that they could sell more amps by moving the numbers around than staying with the old ultra conservative ratings. It's pretty easy to turn a 20 watt amp into a 40 watt one if your standards are high enough initially. Heck, by today's standards 40 watts is probably still fairly conservative considering what the amp will do when compared with budget offerings from some other brands, especially the multichannel amps which have ridiculously unrealistic power numbers.

[Coopmv]

     Yes, all of my '80s NADs were like that. I think they figured out that they could sell more amps by moving the numbers around than staying with the old ultra conservative ratings. It's pretty easy to turn a 20 watt amp into a 40 watt one if your standards are high enough initially. Heck, by today's standards 40 watts is probably still fairly conservative considering what the amp will do when compared with budget offerings from some other brands, especially the multichannel amps which have ridiculously unrealistic power numbers.

My Crown DC 300A is the only vintage amp I have that is not functional - it gives off a bad hum when connected.  I presume it has a bummed transformer.  My Tandberg 3003 amp works just fine.

[Fëanor]

 

I am quite happy with my Canadian-made PSB's.     

It's sad in a way.  A few months ago I read an interview somewhere, (Stereophile?), with Paul Barton, (the 'P' and 'B' in PSB), who was positively gloating about how wonderful it was to have his speakers built in China and how much better speaker he could sell for cost.

[Coopmv]

It's sad in a way.  A few months ago I read an interview somewhere, (Stereophile?), with Paul Barton, (the 'P' and 'B' in PSB), who was positively gloating about how wonderful it was to have his speakers built in China and how much better speaker he could sell for cost.

Isn't Paul Barton up there age-wise and probably sold his company already?  I have the Axiom M60's in my living room.  They are my second pair of Canadian-made speakers.  I got them at Christmas in 01.

[Fëanor]

Not sure.  Did the link I posted mention class D?  I think most digital amps are class D.  No?

Yes, but "digital" is a bit of a misnomer in fact, (and the 'D' in Class 'D' doesn't refer to digital).  "Switching" amp is more correct, that is, one whose transistors are either fully on or fully off.  Both the volume and frequency of sound is determined by the length of time the transistors are switched on vs. off.  To create smooth wave forms at audio frequences, the frequency at which the transistors are switched must be far higher than the highest audible frequency, typically over [EDIT]300MHz300kHz[/EDIT] as I recall.

[Fëanor]

Isn't Paul Barton up there age-wise and probably sold his company already? ...

I believe (could be wrong) that he is still very involved. Its just he has sold a major interest for funds to continue to expand while at the same time siphoning off retained earnings for his own enjoyment.

[Coopmv]

I believe (could be wrong) that he is still very involved. Its just he has sold a major interest for funds to continue to expand while at the same time siphoning off retained earnings for his own enjoyment.

Anthem, another Canadian audio electronics company, has also tied up with Paradigm.  I have equipments by Anthem and Sonic Frontiers as well.  There are very few standalone audio companies these days.  Even McIntosh, Marantz and Denon are all part of some holdings company ...

[Fëanor]

Anthem, another Canadian audio electronics company, has also tied up with Paradigm.  I have equipments by Anthem and Sonic Frontiers as well.  There are very few standalone audio companies these days.  Even McIntosh, Marantz and Denon are all part of some holdings company ...

Note that I have a Sonic Frontiers LINE 1 preamplifier plus an Assembage DAC; (see my signature).  The one-time president of Sonic Frontiers / Anthem / Assemblage, Chris Johnson, nowadays operates Parts ConneXion, and has no affiliation with Anthem.  Part of his Parts Connexion business, though, is repairing and upgrading old Sonic Frontiers and Anthem equipment.

[Coopmv]

Note that I have a Sonic Frontiers LINE 1 preamplifier; (see my signature).  The one-time president of Sonic Frontiers / Anthem, Chris Johnson, nowadays operates Parts ConneXion, and has no affiliation with Anthem.  Part of his Parts Connexion business, though, is repairing and upgrading old Sonic Frontiers and Anthem equipment.

It is nice to know.  I also have the SF Line 1 and the Anthem CD1, which is still a very nice changer after all these years.  One reason I have not bothered with an SACD player is I also have the NAD S500i and Rega Planet 2000, both excellent redbook CDP's.  Unfortunately, I cannot play the SACD layer of my nearly 200 SACD titles.

[DavidW]

Yes, but "digital" is a bit of a misnomer in fact, (and the 'D' in Class 'D' doesn't refer to digital).  "Switching" amp is more correct, that is, one whose transistors are either fully on or fully off.  Both the volume and frequency of sound is determined by the length of time the transistors are switched on vs. off.  To create smooth wave forms at audio frequences, the frequency at which the transistors are switched must be far higher than the highest audible frequency, typically over 300MHz as I recall.

I always wondered about that, thanks!

[Coopmv]

Yeah. Per Abrahamsen is out after bankrupcy (and that's good for both sound* and build quality), but the brand is growing and the glossy highend line is still made in Norway. New Electrocompaniet have also aquired Dynamic Precision, which has old Tandberg engineers on board. http://www.electrocompaniet.com/

Per Abrahamsen has a new brand: http://www.abrahamsenaudio.com/

*Per Abrahamsen had/has this idea that amplifiers made for playing back recorded music should have a sound. Nuff said.

Valentino

Does Electrocompaniet make any of its products in China?  People thought Tandberg's refusal to shift some of its manufacturing to Asia was the main reason for its subsequent failure.

[Valentino]

I think their entry "Prelude line" is made in the Far East somewhere, mut as far as I know the "Classic line" and "DP line" is made at Tau, Norway. The "making" is soldering boards and assembling the finished product. Nobody ever did everything in-house, you know.

The company owning Electrocompaniet has it's main business in control electronics for the oil industry, where quality is a teeny wee bit more of an issue than in home hifi.

[71 dB]

The only way NAD amps could be said to have a sound relates to their high headroom.  So the 20 watt amps like the legendary 3020 could easily deliver 80 watts cleanly for transient peaks.

I am too young for 3020 but I have read about that legendary amplifier that sold over 1 million units. I don't think it was able to deliver 80 watts peak power into 8 ohm. Sounds too good. I think that's what it delivered into 2 ohms load. My 302 replaced 3020 according to NAD and must be very similar. For 302, NAD gave these power ratings:

Continuous average power output into 8 ohms: 25 W
IHF dynamic power 8/4/2 ohms: 50/60/75 W (dynamic headroom at 8 ohms: 3 dB)

Back in 1993 NAD 302 was their least powerful amplifier but I never managed to overdrive it. The performance of an amplifier is dependent on the signal form. NAD makes amplifiers that perform well with music signals.

The power supply you need to do this is much smaller and cheaper than one designed to deliver 80 watts continuously. So unlike other low power amps of the day the NADs didn't clip or limit when you turned them up. They always sounded like higher power amps. They also had a "soft clipping" circuit but I turned this off since it reduced the headroom. I think they still have this on their amps.

NAD still uses Soft clipping, of course. I have it on in my NAD T762. Gives extra protection for loudspeakers.

[Coopmv]

I think their entry "Prelude line" is made in the Far East somewhere, mut as far as I know the "Classic line" and "DP line" is made at Tau, Norway. The "making" is soldering boards and assembling the finished product. Nobody ever did everything in-house, you know.

The company owning Electrocompaniet has it's main business in control electronics for the oil industry, where quality is a teeny wee bit more of an issue than in home hifi.

No doubt.  Control electronics that monitors oil production in the North Sea 24/7 has to be precise and robust enough to withstand the elements.  Top-notched quality is certainly a must here ...

[Coopmv]

I am too young for 3020 but I have read about that legendary amplifier that sold over 1 million units. I don't think it was able to deliver 80 watts peak power into 8 ohm. Sounds too good. I think that's what it delivered into 2 ohms load. My 302 replaced 3020 according to NAD and must be very similar. For 302, NAD gave these power ratings:

Continuous average power output into 8 ohms: 25 W
IHF dynamic power 8/4/2 ohms: 50/60/75 W (dynamic headroom at 8 ohms: 3 dB)

Back in 1993 NAD 302 was their least powerful amplifier but I never managed to overdrive it. The performance of an amplifier is dependent on the signal form. NAD makes amplifiers that perform well with music signals.

NAD still uses Soft clipping, of course. I have it on in my NAD T762. Gives extra protection for loudspeakers.

I am looking at the brochure for the Power Envelope NAD 2200, the amp that started the trend of high dynamic headroom amps within NAD.  In stereo mode: IHF dynamic headroom at 8 ohms is +6db, IHF dynamic power is 400W (26 dbW) into 8 ohms, 600W (28 dbW) into 4 ohms and 800W (29 dbW) into 2 ohms.  Its continuous average power output into 8 ohms is only a modest 100 W (20 dbW). I will try to scan the brochure into the computer and upload it later today so we can all share.