Is it a good pre-amp?
Written: Jun 10 '01
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Sound: |
 |
|
| Ease of Use: |
|
|
| Durability: |
 |
|
|
Pros: Powerful exciting, well equipped.
Cons: Bass a little thick, only a little.
The Bottom Line: This is a good sounding pre-amp, but I can't see how much of the sound comes from this NAD alone.
|
|
|
| MichaelHatton's Full Review: NAD C160 Amplifier |
SO this is the NAD C160. What is it you ask? A receiver? No. An Amplifier? No. Then What Is It?
The NAD C160 is a pre-amplfier. This means you need a POWER AMPLIFIER to power the speakers. The pre-amp simply takes all the input sources and outputs them through the input selector. But the clever part is that it varies its output so the power amp can be controlled in volume. Simply put, the power amp is powered fully at max all the time, but the input feed is low and the output is low as a result. Ok if you looking at this NAD then you should know a bit about pre-amps and all that hi fi jargon.
Me and the NAD
This pre-amp is owned by my cousin. I borrowed it for a month to see how it sounded in my hi fi. I lent my cousin my integrated NAD (C340). He also lent me his power amp the Naim MAP 90/3, both quite expensive. I had an interesting week with this and the Naim. But lets concentrate on the NAD.
first impressions of it are quite good, and it seems to justify its price with performance. And that was an area which was questionable, given the fact my C340 cost a little less. Let me take you through the C160:
Features
A remote is also included and is the usual super slim NAD style. I have found these remotes a tad sticky in hot conditions, as the buttons are rubber. Alas this pre-amp was fitted with a MM/MC phono stage (moving magnet/moving coil) which I didn’t use for obvious reasons. There are two tapes loops and a set of four line levels. And some of the more popular add-ons, like headphone socket and tone controls; these controls also have a defeat button to bypass them. The balance knob is quite useless really, it is never used, and I’m curious to why it s there anyway, especially for music listening.
Build/Looks
The looks are simple NAD style, with the usual grey front with some white text, and black plastic attachments. It really desires more from an expensive amp. But like I have said before with NAD equipment, they spend more money on the inside. The build is almost identical with the C340 I own. The buttons are soft at touch, and volume knob silky soft to turn. The case work seems fairly in place, and the front has a strong robust feel.
Sound
If there is an area where I was a little sceptical with it was here. Would tow boxes be better than one? I could understand the intelligent thinking to it; two boxes two separate power supplies, separated circuit boards from electronic interference, less heat etc. I was unsure again to whether a pre amp made much difference. I mean the signal is simply sent straight through. The power amp would create the sound not the pre amp. After connecting it all up I was in for a surprise. All my music became full of life. I was quite amazed at the difference from my C340. Treble benefited from a bit more air and slightly tighter production. Bass was a little different. There seemed a little more kick, and punch, resulting in a powerful and enjoyable sound. Mid range was by far a lot better. Drum snaps were a lot quicker, so the rock music I listen to had more crunch and loudness. Vocals are better staged, so they appear in the middle of the music. It also shown up how a CD was created, I found a number were there was a bit of crackle in the mist of instruments. If there is a criticism here it is the bass; good and weighty it is, but it tends to over shadow the punch at the higher bass notes, making it sound a little thumpy or thick.
I find it hard to understand how much of this music is derived from the NAD. Or was it all from the Naim? It’s a question that makes a pre/power setup questionable. You really can’t judge a Pre amp, other than in a group test with the same power amp. I must say, if I were upgrading I would consider this set-up, but it seems quite expensive, and the two box setup is a little inconvenient.
Again it is very hard to focus on what the NAD alone can do. This setup sounds great, and only if I had another pre-amp at hand at the same price, would I know if there is a difference in sound with the two.
To put it simple the NAD certainly sounds a great pre-amp, but whether it is making the music, other than passing it on – only controlling output – straight to the power amp is a question needing an answer. On the other hand, my cousin may have tried other pre amps with the Naim to get the nest sound so this may give some credit toward the NAD.
All in all this is a fine pre amp, it reserves a good level of features for sound, its brimming with sound quality and is a reasonable price to compete. If you are after a good sounding pre/power setup I can say this system is far better than any integrated but whether there are better pre-amps out there is questionable.
Recommended:
Yes
Amount Paid (US$): He paid $476
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
MichaelHatton
|
 - Top 200 |
|
Location: Darlington, England
Reviews written: 192
Trusted by: 59 members
About Me:
Retired
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.