NAD C326BEE does it need to burn/run in?

i went to a shop the other day and listened to the c326 and found the sound similair to what MG is describing..have to say i was pretty taken aback as the bass was nothing to shout about and from all the info on the net i was expecting lets say not exesive bass,but enough to say the least..but it just wasnt there,which really surprised me and goes to show that demo is the best way to judge..powerwise no worries there as the volume didnt go above 10 a clock,but the sound wasnt engaging at all,the sales guy tried turning the bass knob a bit to give it a bit more oomphm and it did,but there shoudnt be any need for that,speakers were floorstanding acoustic solution i think..and the amp was probably played a good few times as it was e demo one..i'll be going today to check on a new c352,hope i won't be disapointed as with the c326..

 

Yep, I've been tweaking the tone controls something that shouldn't "have" to be done IMO. It's currently on treble at 10 o'clock a d bass at 2 o'clock. I've never felt the need to reduce the treble on an amp in my life. I don't know how they review kit these days, if this is a warm bass heavy amp I'd hate to hear a bright one.

 

if you like your C350' be very careful with the thought of "upgrading". The C350 is a fantastic amp, I would never change from it if mine hadn't died.

 

 

"NAD C326BEE does it need to burn/run in?"

No

The problem with buying another second hand C350 is that they are all getting on now and you could be back in the same boat. A good second hand one will cost you about £130-£150 so you might as well just get your old one serviced and brought back to life, it would then be as good as new then.

 

I've been thinking about that, I have some Gale XL-315 spearker cable from a very long time ago. I used it with my very old Pioneer A-110 amp and new at the time Tannoy Mercury M2.5 speakers.

After a while I changed to the QED silver anniversary, on the rather laid back setup I had then the QED significantly tightened the bass and brought out more top end clarity. So if my memory is right, then maybe a trial with the Gale cable could tone town this strident top end. I'll try that today.

 

Demos in the dealers never sound right to me, gear always performs better at home and is the only way to tell how it's going to sound. It does make you wonder how products get the ratings they do at times. If all modern amps are forward and bright they should be described as such the C326 is certainly not bass heavy.

 

If at one given time say everyone produced poor sounding products, I'm sure one of them would get 5 stars due to being the best from a bad bunch. We live in a age where Hi-Fi mags review mobile phones, it kind of says it all really.

 

Yeah that's why I decided to treat myself to a new NAD thinking that it would be at least acceptable to me. Getting mine fixed regardless of cost may happen yet.

Thanks for all of your input people

It's nice to talk hifi with hifi folk thanks again!

For my Marantz pm 6004: almost 35 h burn-in-time; I wanted buy Nad 326, reading reviews, but the mid freq. of Mara seemed more articulate and liquid and with a good phonostage; for the bass dpt : they were almost the same, but at low vol, while the Nads fade away, the PM 6004, instead, has the loudness possibility...For you, perhaps , the solution is a good sub, but I think that, anyway, Nad is like to have a check...or a Golf.

Btw, I owned 30 Ys ago some Nads: a 3020, 60 W pre and power separate and a 100 w integrated and they were all a little dry with my spk ( Advent, Kef, BW)  

I've installed the old Gale speaker cable I had lying around. It's been a long time since I've messed around changing cables, my memories of the differences between the Gale and QED were correct. I no longer have a very fatiguing upper mid/lower treble, with the QED in place I was getting very tired of the sound very quickly. Now with the Gale installed the sound is much less sharp, strings and high hat's aren't attacking my ears now.

The sound now sounds much more like my old amp with the QED cables, just with a tighter bass. I have lost some of the detail with this cable but that forward presentation before was just way too much. Now it's more natural than artificial.

It's amazing how much difference a cable can make, it should not be underestimated and consideration to how cables a work with a given system should be given consideration.

glad you had an improvement

Thankyou, I didn't expect to have too downgrade my cables due to such a forward sound. At least it seems to be doing the trick

 

 

plastic penguin, I'll add the Arcam to my list

MeanandGreen - don't worry, I'm in no rush to upgrade and I won't get rid of it even after upgrading - I'm just seeing if I can improve my hifi sound with better a better amp.

Ps - good point about the cables, an often overlooked aspect. I've got the QED Silver anniversary bi-wires on my NAD C350 amp with Tannoy Revolution R2 speakers but they don't sound harsh or bright, they compliment each other beautifully but I can see how they could with a bright amp.

I had the QED silver anniversary  in my set up for about 13 or more years with a Pioneer A-110 amp, Ariston AX-910 amp, Tannoy Mercury M2.5 speakers, then my Nad C350 with the Tannoys and finally the B&W DM 601 S3 biwired. It is a very good cable, never had any problems with it until changing amps now. I still wouldn't say it sounded harsh just a lot of detail in the upper midrange which was very prominent.  The soundstage was bigger also, but it was very tiring to listen to.

It just shows how not all things sound best with the same cables I suppose. Now I'm using the Gale 315 strand with the 326BEE the sound is now very much what I had before my old C350 went pop. I'm pleased to say.

Good luck in your quest for a new amp.