Nad is better then McIntosh?

Needs more artifacts in that video. Also, random comparison using a video with 2k views and 2/3s red bar probably isn't the best source. So what's the point of this thread? Is brand A better than brand B? It depends on what you define as 'better'. Both NAD and McIntosh make a large range of products so do you have a specific product to compare in each line?

The Mac would have more long term value.

I am curious why you would ask this question? From the examples you offer, only one person posted a comment on youtube saying it was because he owned both brands and now has the NAD.

If that is the case, then Parasound is better than NAD. Why? Because I now own Parasound when I use to have NAD and I say it is.

See how ridiculous some anonymous youtube comment is. See how ridiculous my comment is.
Edited by Paraneer - 11/18/12 at 10:11am

Very subjective, can you afford Mcintosh? If not, I would say the NAD is better for you.

This type of question always need context :

Price point
Goal of use
Better for who
Better in what
Do you already own it

Now NAD has a bigger price-range than McIntosh making the question even weirder imho.

Daniel.

i would say that's it, in a nutshell...

so there is yer answer

McIntosh is very similar to Bose. A company with marginal to horrible, overpriced products that are highly regarded by the uninformed.

While I understand that price alone does not make anything better, clearly he has not taken the time to listen or hunt out a MC dealer. If he can't afford it, the NAD is better "for him."

McIntosh has roughly the same position as Leica has in the camera body market.
It is a "boutique" product, which delivers good quality at extraordinary prices with some special "quirks" of its own.
Others may provide the same listening experience at much lower pricing levels but without the aura and image of "owning a McIntosh".

^^^

+1...

i want one someday...

Thread title: NAD is better then McIntosh?

First off, when we say that one product is better than another without qualification, then we must be addressing the gestalt or whole entire shape or image of the product. That covers many dimensions of performance, including sound quality, reliability, human engineering, appearance, relevant features, etc.

However, based on the rest of the thread, it appears that only sound quality is actually being talked about.

Why would anyone believe that either of them was so technically defective as to impart a characteristic coloration to the music they process?

is a Lexus better than a Bentley?

If you are looking for value, or fuel efficiency or reliability, surely Lexus is better. If you want a Bentley in your garage, surely the Lexus can't begin to compete...

Also what product do you mean? Mcintosh makes amps, speakers, receivers, cd players, and even wall clocks. If only looking at amps, there are integrated, pre, power as well are AV pre amps.

I own a mcintosh power amp, and i won't buy NAD power amps. Because I like bentleys in my garage.

I also won't buy anything based on a youtube video.

I've heard both at a stereo shop in town through a pair of Klipsch RF-7 IIs and couldn't tell you the difference. If it matters to you, the Mac amps look amazing. Was a Nad M3 and a McIntosh MA6300. Both were very much out of my range, but the guy was happy to let me sample them. Also included was a Marantz PM15S2.

Ever hear of people who say strange things just to get people's attention?


Yes.

They both sound pretty good to me. I think I heard my first McIntosh system in 1960 or so...

Lets see if I can go that far down memory lane. C19 preamp and a couple of MC75 power amps?

Marantz 7 preamp and dual model 9s?

I've heard a number of pretty cool systems over the years....

I have a NAD reciever I use in a secondary system and a Mcintosh mc252 driving my main speakers in my theater system. Obviously, I like both brands because I own both. I did hook the 252 up to the pre outs on the NAD once to compare them. To me, the 252 was the clear winner. More dynamic, clearer mids and highs. It has twice the rated power as the Nad and costs a lot more so it's not a fair fight. I know the McIntosh is looked at by some as being overpriced but the build quality can not be questioned. I know someone who has a 50+ year old Mac and it sounds and works as good as ever. To me, comparing McIntosh to Bose is a little far fetched.

I like Dr Mark's answer too.

Please explain why you think this.
While McIntosh is expensive the specs and materials are top notch.
I also do not see complaints about reliability on the various forums.

I don't have any 'high end' components but if I were to ever go that direction McIntosh would be at the top of my wish list (assuming money was no object) if for no other reason than I like the way it looks.
If there are factors that really do make McIntosh another Bose I would like to know.