Integrated Amp Choices 3K Range - NAD M3? - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 48 Old 01-20-2011, 02:29 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
mazbl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lansing, MI.
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboFC3S
In all honesty the Emotiva combo will deliver more resolution than those Celeston A3's are capable of ... spending any more to power them IMO is a waste.

If you want entry into high end, you'll need to replace those speakers first. Those have a very 'un focused' soundstage with top-to-bottom integration that could be greatly improved.
Turbo, how familiar are you with the A3's? @ 8K a pair, I know A3 owners who prefer these over the B&W Nauts. Of course to each there own. But really, my speakers are my favorite part of my system. I bought hem for there Mid-Range performance. While most other manufactures were ignoring there mids & focusing on Highs & Lows. Remember the A3 was Celestions FlagShip model, the best speaker they ever made..

GO BLUE!
mazbl is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 48 Old 01-20-2011, 02:38 PM
Advanced Member
 
TurboFC3S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: STL, MO
Posts: 819
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazbl View Post
Turbo, how familiar are you with the A3's? @ 8K a pair, I know A3 owners who prefer these over the B&W Nauts. Of course to each there own. But really, my speakers are my favorite part of my system. I bought hem for there Mid-Range performance. While most other manufactures were ignoring there mids & focusing on Highs & Lows. Remember the A3 was Celestions FlagShip model, the best speaker they ever made..
I heard them a few times probably 4-5 years ago, in a good room with a nice front end. My impression was that they lacked focus, all the signals felt a bit intermingled intead of existing in their own space. That smearing made delivery of fine detail and micro-dynamics difficult.

Overall they ARE a good speaker if your tastes lean toward the romantic side. But because of their nature, inability to flesh out fine detail, spending buku bucks on front end gear is going to yield minimal improvements.

Speaker Designer/Builder
Vapor Audio
TurboFC3S is offline  
post #33 of 48 Old 01-20-2011, 03:00 PM
 
AJinFLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Take a guess
Posts: 1,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcreyn View Post
Personally, I'm not a Mac guy.
See, that's the problem with you so called "subjectivists"(false), since your choice amongst amplifiers is based purely on the imagination (psychogenic), not anything related to the really real world of soundwaves, then there can be no consensus. Every "subjectivist" imagines something in their own mind...and based on the power of suggestion, may indeed coincide with anothesr imagination and hear the same thing....or not.
So you will see tons of different suggestions as to what sounds good/bad/best, etc....in your case, psychologically, you don't like Macs. Others rave about them.
The flip side of the coin, is that any technically literate person of sufficient intellect to comprehend the electro-acoustic issues(this eliminates all audiophiles), will agree with my technical (soundwave, really real word) assessment, or disagree and present their own technical rebuttal (none so far) to my choice of soundfield in room correction and higher unclipped waveform capacity, as the superior (soundwave) choice.
No big deal if you can't understand any of this.

cheers,

AJ
AJinFLA is offline  
post #34 of 48 Old 01-20-2011, 03:08 PM
 
AJinFLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Take a guess
Posts: 1,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboFC3S View Post
I heard them a few times probably 4-5 years ago, in a good room with a nice front end. My impression was that they lacked focus, all the signals felt a bit intermingled intead of existing in their own space. That smearing made delivery of fine detail and micro-dynamics difficult.
How did you isolate the "sound" problems that you "heard" to the loudspeakers...and not...the room, the amplifier, the preamplifier, source player, IC's, power cords, electrical outlet, connectors, capacitors, resistors, dielectrics, metals, "burn in", "break in", sun spots, gremlins, lord knows what else audiophiles can "hear", etc, etc????
Wow, that's quite a remarkable feat of isolation, since each will "contribute" their own "sound"....according to you and your ilk.
AJinFLA is offline  
post #35 of 48 Old 01-20-2011, 04:13 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
mazbl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lansing, MI.
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Class A View Post
If your moving up the price line, around $6000 besides the Mac also the Musical Fidelity A5 and the Luxman 509 first 20 wpc run in pure Class A at 8ohms and 40wpc into 4. As far as running speakers it can easily run a pair of Quad ESl's. Also has high quality phono pre amp and excellent headphone amp. Also check out the Ayer AX-7e and the Esoteric AI-10. But my ultimate would be a Pass Labs INT-150 $7100 however. In the final analysis go out and demo as much as you can also see if some of the dealers will let you take the unit home to check out how it fits into your system. The dealer I go to on consecutive weekends let me take home a pair of Thiel 2.4's then Aerial Model 6's. The aerials stayed they worked best in my room. Nothing better than a at home demo especially with the amount of change your going to drop. Good luck the hunt is 1/2 the fun.
Thanks for your time in providing good advice Class A!

[quote=penngray;19863464]Honestly it was not very well said. I suspect he knows little about amp designs and price should never be a factor in SQ in audio.

Please don't "suspect". It's unbecoming...

[quote=penngray;19863464] might want to learn this and save yourself thousands on electronics putting all those $$$ into what is REALLY important. The room, room treatments and speakers is truely what drivers SQ in audio.

So I should buy specific furniture for my room so my speakers/amp sound better?

[quote=penngray;19863464] also say "Doing this right the first time" are you saying you have little experience in audio?? You have never owned expensive gear?

No, your saying it all...

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post
you are serious about doing it right then please, please spend some time learning about audio science. That means do not read the marketing spin posted online or in magazines talking about dramatic/exagerrate and fictious differences in electronics.
Audio science? What happened to if it sounds good?

[quote=TurboFC3S;19863623]In all honesty the Emotiva combo will deliver more resolution than those Celeston A3's are capable of ... spending any more to power them IMO is a waste.

So, a sub $1000 system would do my 8K speakers justice?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboFC3S View Post
you want entry into high end, you'll need to replace those speakers first. Those have a very 'un focused' soundstage with top-to-bottom integration that could be greatly improved.
Improved with what? In your opinion...

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevensctt View Post
There are so many choices and I'm a big fan of integrated amps. Musically, the better integrated amps do seem to have unique "personalities".

Good said!

I'm sure the Nad M3 is very good, maybe try to listen to others such as Rega, Primare, Creek and Musical Fidelity to name a few.

Also, there is a pinned topic over at Audigon titled, "Best Integrated, Period". The thread was stared 2 1/2 years ago but still active. Give it a look.
Thanks for the info, I appreciate it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post
In the hopes of learning what the OP really needs, this quoted post has a great question.

mazbl, what speakers do you have and what are you really trying to solve? You have two threads both have the $3K price target, one is about amps and the other is asking about integrated amps....is this the same problem?
No, changing my mind along the way...

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post
I was hoping for some specs or design discussion on how an amp can be correlated to a Mercedes SLK, that is all sorry if that angers you. Im more then happy to know if brand X is superior. I love that products cost more for a real reason other then what a marketing department dictates.

Audio is not religion, audio has a mountain of science behind it, years and years of discoveries. Anyone that is designing,building, installing systems are not relying on the idea of subjective faith to do their job the best way possible. They are instead using hard core measurements and facts that have been solved and plubished in audio science journals for decades.
There really should be no correlation between the two topics and its not even allow on the forum.

I know you have never done a measurement, you have posted that before but I think you owe it to yourself to learn a little bit about what measurements have to offer. If you have no education or experience on the measurement topic how do you know what it can do and not do??

There is one simple fact. There is not a sound that the speaker makes that can not be measured. Since amps effect the sound the speaker makes, we can measure the impact of any amp on any speaker.
VERY WELL SAID!

[quote=TurboFC3S;19865922]I heard them a few times probably 4-5 years ago, in a good room with a nice front end. My impression was that they lacked focus, all the signals felt a bit intermingled intead of existing in their own space. That smearing made delivery of fine detail and micro-dynamics difficult.

I can't even remember what I had for lunch..

Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboFC3S View Post
they ARE a good speaker if your tastes lean toward the romantic side. But because of their nature, inability to flesh out fine detail, spending buku bucks on front end gear is going to yield minimal improvements.
Hmm....

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post
See, that's the problem with you so called "subjectivists"(false), since your choice amongst amplifiers is based purely on the imagination (psychogenic), not anything related to the really real world of soundwaves, then there can be no consensus. Every "subjectivist" imagines something in their own mind...and based on the power of suggestion, may indeed coincide with anothesr imagination and hear the same thing....or not.
So you will see tons of different suggestions as to what sounds good/bad/best, etc....in your case, psychologically, you don't like Macs. Others rave about them.
The flip side of the coin, is that any technically literate person of sufficient intellect to comprehend the electro-acoustic issues(this eliminates all audiophiles), will agree with my technical (soundwave, really real word) assessment, or disagree and present their own technical rebuttal (none so far) to my choice of soundfield in room correction and higher unclipped waveform capacity, as the superior (soundwave) choice.
No big deal if you can't understand any of this.

cheers,

AJ
That's right!

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post
How did you isolate the "sound" problems that you "heard" to the loudspeakers...and not...the room, the amplifier, the preamplifier, source player, IC's, power cords, electrical outlet, connectors, capacitors, resistors, dielectrics, metals, "burn in", "break in", sun spots, gremlins, lord knows what else audiophiles can "hear", etc, etc????
Wow, that's quite a remarkable feat of isolation, since each will "contribute" their own "sound"....according to you and your ilk.
Again, well put...

Thanks all for your kind replies. I've been a member here for about Ten Years. Learned a lot from this forum. It has gotten down right "brutal" to post a question anymore...All this discussion has led me down the path to the McIntosh ma7000. I heard it today & have never heard a sound that I liked more. For my personal tastes, I'm pretty sure this Integrated will mate well with my A3's! Any input on likes/dislikes of this particular model would be appreciated... Thanks all!

GO BLUE!
mazbl is offline  
post #36 of 48 Old 01-20-2011, 04:35 PM
Member
 
mcreyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 75
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazbl View Post


Thanks all for your kind replies. I've been a member here for about Ten Years. Learned a lot from this forum. It has gotten down right "brutal" to post a question anymore...All this discussion has led me down the path to the McIntosh ma7000. I heard it today & have never heard a sound that I liked more. For my personal tastes, I'm pretty sure this Integrated will mate well with my A3's! Any input on likes/dislikes of this particular model would be appreciated... Thanks all!

Your not kidding about the brutal part. A lot of insecure people who are more interested in being correct than in ascertaining and helping.

Did you get a chance to listen to any of the new digital integrated amps like the Wyred 4 Sound? As long as you like the Mac, nothing else matters.
mcreyn is offline  
post #37 of 48 Old 01-20-2011, 06:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
TurboFC3S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: STL, MO
Posts: 819
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
mazbl - I didn't mean to be rude or try to talk down your speakers. They are a good, some people even think great, speaker. They're just not at all what I like in a speaker. I prefer a speaker that gets out of the way and turns your room into a venue - the A3's don't do that. Personally if I had them and was looking for an amp, I'd try to find something that balances them out a bit ... the McIntosh I think will make them sound too bottom heavy. They're already a bottom heavy speaker, and the Mc is a bottom heavy amp ... together I think it might be a bit much, unless that's what you like.

Speaker Designer/Builder
Vapor Audio
TurboFC3S is offline  
post #38 of 48 Old 01-20-2011, 07:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Class A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 36
integrated amp choices 3K range NAD M3? Well with an inflamitory comment like that of course your going to start trouble. What's wrong with you??? Just kidding. Congrats on the Mac. If your happy then that's all that counts. I've been fooling around w/audio since the days of wonderful Mono. I also produced radio shows in the Army (AFN) and it was always a joy putting together great sounding shows. But the brutal way this thread turned over a simple question wow just in your face and confrontational all over a hobby that I personally have enjoyed for years. Right now I'm enjoying Sinatra on my distortion filled 25yr. old Linn Sondek LP12 and could care less what anyone thinks.
Class A is online now  
post #39 of 48 Old 01-20-2011, 07:15 PM
 
AJinFLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Take a guess
Posts: 1,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboFC3S View Post

the McIntosh I think will make them sound too bottom heavy. They're already a bottom heavy speaker, and the Mc is a bottom heavy amp

Because:
1) You said so
2) Some form of LF boost not associated with the FR controls
3) Your imagination
4) You "heard it" (and just maybe saw it too, had priori knowledge, etc.)...and using your amazing audiophile gating technique, isolated the "bottom heavy" sound to the Mac amplifier.....not the loudspeaker that was playing at the time, nor the room, the tone controls, source player, IC's, power cords, electrical outlet, connectors, capacitors, resistors, dielectrics, metals, "burn in", "break in", sun spots, gremlins, lord knows what else audiophiles can "hear", etc, etc....that purportedly contribute to the 'sound'.

Would this "bottom heaviness" show up in a (soundwave) FR measurement (when not playing Queen)?? Only in a fMRI?
Or is it one those (many) "can hear it"/"can't measure it" apparitions that plague many an audiophile "system"?
AJinFLA is offline  
post #40 of 48 Old 01-21-2011, 08:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CruelInventions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 4,481
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcreyn View Post

Your not kidding about the brutal part. A lot of insecure people who are more interested in being correct than in ascertaining and helping.

Call me crazy, but I tend to think that conveying accurate information, being correct, would be the most important element of "helping".

Mourning the disappearance of the -ly suffix. Words being cut-off before they've had a chance to fully form, left incomplete, with their shoelaces untied and their zippers undone. If I quote your post (or post in your thread) without comment, please check your zipper.
CruelInventions is online now  
post #41 of 48 Old 01-22-2011, 05:25 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
mazbl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lansing, MI.
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by CruelInventions View Post


Call me crazy, but I tend to think that conveying accurate information, being correct, would be the most important element of "helping".

It's the way in which you "convey"...When you start assuming & attacking the OP, that's not okay. And to assume one is accurate & correct, well that's not okay either Cruelinventions...

GO BLUE!
mazbl is offline  
post #42 of 48 Old 01-22-2011, 08:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
truwarrior22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,207
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazbl View Post
Looking @ integrated amps for 4 Ohm Celestion A3's. The NAD M3 is looking intriguing. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
I haven't heard the NAD M3, but I moved away from two Emotiva XPA-1's and a XPA-3 to a NAD M25 and I couldn't be happier. The build quality is much better in the NAD where as the Emotiva felt cheap, i.e. plastic buttons, ugly rubber feet, thin caseing, ugly cheap feeling connectors, poor instruction booklet, etc. Also every now and then the XPA-1's didn't turn off properly, made an annoying ping sound every 15-20 min, and one of them even had to be returned do to a ground issue causing a hum...

Lastly I feel the SQ was much better with my speakers then the Emotiva amps and the Denon's internal amp. The main difference I noticed is that the sound was more forward sounding with the externals amps, but the NAD seemed smoother in the higher frequencies where as the Emotiva seemed a bit harsh and fatiguing especially the XPA-1 over the XPA-3.
truwarrior22 is offline  
post #43 of 48 Old 02-12-2011, 10:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Veda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Asia
Posts: 2,189
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazbl View Post

Well said. Any thoughts? I've also been looking @ the McIntosh ma6900.. I know it's double the 3k, but I want to do this right the first time....

You're gonna drop more than 5K on an integrated then you should get the advanced NAD M2 which is probably the most accurate amp in the world right now. Why bother with an old McIntosh?
Veda is offline  
post #44 of 48 Old 06-08-2012, 04:22 AM
Advanced Member
 
oOOBillO0o's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On the move..
Posts: 551
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post


You're gonna drop more than 5K on an integrated then you should get the advanced NAD M2 which is probably the most accurate amp in the world right now. Why bother with an old McIntosh?

I wouldn't dismiss McIntosh as old, but $5K is significant but it will retain it's value when it comes to trade in time if you want something else.

McIntosh Labs! What am I listening to?
oOOBillO0o is offline  
post #45 of 48 Old 06-08-2012, 05:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazbl View Post

Looking @ integrated amps for 4 Ohm Celestion A3's. The NAD M3 is looking intriguing. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Since the issue has been raised, I would like to ask the OP whether his intent for this thread about amplifiers as components of accurate audio systems, or amplifiers as status symbols?
arnyk is offline  
post #46 of 48 Old 06-09-2012, 08:39 AM
Senior Member
 
unbridled_id's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 273
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I own the c375 and it's a nice performer, but from what I heard from the dealer the M3 is more refined. The M3 is build like a tank, dual mono, resistor based volume control, and a selectable crossover. With the c375 they now sell it with the DAC built in so that is nice.

That being said I really love the look of the Mac and though I have never heard either of the models mentioned I have not doubt that they are great performers.
unbridled_id is offline  
post #47 of 48 Old 06-09-2012, 09:38 AM
Advanced Member
 
oOOBillO0o's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On the move..
Posts: 551
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Given NAD's track record, and I owned some of their components, the M3 is probably offers killer sound. Still, would it look good in a movie scene too? McIntosh for the win.

McIntosh Labs! What am I listening to?
oOOBillO0o is offline  
post #48 of 48 Old 06-09-2012, 11:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
Tank_PD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 777
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Not sure if you are still sticking to the original price point of 3K, but I really like the Marantz PM15S2. Can be had for cheaper if you buy the matching disc player. I think it's a great looking amp with plenty of power, but not quite the specs of the NAD.
Tank_PD is offline  
Reply 2 Channel Audio

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off