Do you agree with them?
Our opinion of Musical Fidelity is not a good one, they are just ordinary mass-market amps that have user manuals written in simplistic patronising terms for the Muppets who buy them & keep them thinking they've bought well & never have used more than 50w max of the 250w! They are like the Pioneer SX850-950, big impressive show-off items that don't deliver the real sound. If you've not heard better you won't know they are just ordinary.
a while back a store worker on the phone told me that the musical fidelity amp is much better then my nad. I told him that I was impressed with my nad. he thought that i would enjoy hearing it and might not like the nad as much if I heard the musical fidelity integrated amp. after reading that sites post though I wonder if they are right or wrong. I never heard musical fidelity before. what are your thoughts on the brands amps. are you impressed with them? i keep hearing people say they are to forward sounding and also bright.
what do you all think about this?
Well, in a quick google search, I didnt find any negative reviews of MF equipment. I would take one single review with a grain of salt if it disagrees with the majority of others.
That said, at a similar power I very much doubt you could tell the difference between it and your NAD.
I've had a Musical Fidelity integrated amp, the A5, for almost eight years for my stereo. I'm satisfied. I haven't had a bit of trouble with it. Of course, the brand, like anything else, isn't for all people. Whether it's better or worse than anything else out there is anyone's guess.
A store in New York City sells Musical Fidelity and Krell and Nad. I am going to try and visit the store sometime and see if I can tell a difference. I also bought a Rotel this year and like it, but I feel like the Nad is more powerful then my Rotel. If I can't hear a difference in the more expensive amps then I will stick with Nad and rotel integrated amps for upgrades since I like the sound of them. I like the sound of denon also.
The article is taken completely out of the context and I don't know if it's done on purpose. You seem to start a lot of these type of threads with so-and-so said this and that, do you agree...I dunno if these add to anything new or worthy of discussion TBH.
The person who wrote that also is a huge vintage tube fan and if you care to read the other pages, his last recommendable good amp was in 1985! Everything else after 1977 or 78 except one in 85 is no good. He also said anything that is heavy, or with a very low THD or >50W isn't good design...
I happen to have the MF 308 but the integrated version AND the Arcam C31 mentioned on the same page: I guess I should have jumped off the bridge by now!