Graduating to NAD and don't know what ...?

hello Doctor

Well you need to be sure of how you are going to use it as a HT or a music system primarily. if you either listen to TV or listen to music get an all in one system . if you like to listen to music while the rest of the family wants to watch TV, keep them separate for domestic peace

1. IF hifi and HT on the same system, it would be complicated to have the same speakers for both as it would involve cable switching between treminals etc etc.

Although there are more expensive options like separate preamp/power amp combinations..they may not be of interest to you.

Hence the option would be to get a 5 channel receiver which is musical as well. Denon and marantz are known of being good on music as well as HT .

If you are keen on having a NAD as an AMP, would suggest getting a power amp and then choose a receiver which has a pre out as well. connect the pre-out for the front channels via the NAD amp which feed the speakers..
But this would be an expensive option as..
1. U need extra pair of interconnects.
2. signal path is longer..as although all receivers do have a stereo option, they still pass through the DSP electron ics and hence sound will not be as "pure".

Hence might be a good idea to extend your receiver budget a bit more with the amount planned on the NAD and..buy a higher end receiver!

2. Regarding speakers, center channel is the most important in a 5.1 channel system as 50-70% of the sound ie the dialogues come frim them. front speakers take care of the music as well as 20 % of dialogues. while surround are for ambient sounds.
Two things to look for
a) Sensitivity of all speakers should be in the same region. ie if the volume is increased they should all go up by the same amount. this is more important for the center and front. this should be available from the specs

b) tonality of the center front should be similiar. when listening to a vocal piece there should be very little difference in sund when switching between them

Thst is the reason why it is recommended that the front three speakers be of the same brand and model

3. If you are looking for the mucsical subwoofer..they come in the range of USD 1000 +. for Home Theater a sonodyne subwoofer should be good enough.

OR

buy a NAD c320bee amp and the mission or KEF speakers and setup a 2 channel system.. and keep the HT system separate with an all sonodyne system !
I personally prefer KEF to misssion..but know people who do so otherwise as well. hence you wouod need to choose..but both are good speakers.
The wharfedale diamond are recommended only in case budget is a constraint...
Wharfedale diamond is better suited to HT IMHO..YOu are better off with a Mission or KEF for music !

Dear ARJ !

Thanks for your help !

I think I will go for pure music option at this stage and a separate HT at a later date.

NAD 320BEE has the option of pre-in to power amp, do you think that it could be used in conjunction with HT?

I have auditioned KEF and have really liked them but havent been'able to make up my mind about which model. Your suggestion? (Cresta 20 / Coda 90 / Q 4)

As suggested by you, if I go for a completely independant HT then do you thinks its OK to:
1. go for BookShelf speakers for front channels
2. used Sonodyne Sonus or basic Wharfedale for HT
3. Denon (? model) or anything less expensive

I don't want to compromise on music but would definitely keep my budget in check for HT

Regards

Dr. Sanjay Dhawan

Regarding HT..it depends on how many movies you watch and if the effects sound good to you. try watching DVDs with DTS of any war/action movie and if you feel involved and get a kick out of it..go for it. Bookshelves are enough for HT as most bookshelves go down to 60 Hz and in an HT usually 100 hz or less are fed to the subwoofer..hence that should be no problem.


Regarding the NAD it does have a pre and a power. but in a stereo setup both of these are important. in usual entry level HT receivers, due to cost reasons, the pre- power for 2 channel is very basic. hence it is preferable to use the NAD for both.
there are recievers which do both very well..but their cost is high enough such that setting them separate would be economical !

Hence if you can it is better to keep the HT and stereo separate

regarding KEF, the choice should be yours based on your budget !
I have heard only the Q series and rather liked them although a bit bright, should go well with the NAD
. have heard about the cresta as being good...but no experience with the coda series..

BTW what is the cd player you plan to use ? a good cdp as well as thick speaker cables and a decent pair of interconnects are important as well. a poor cdp will not make a sound any good no matter what amp/speaker you have.

Thanks ARJ !

I am planning to go for very basic CD player - Teac. In past I have had 3 CD players getting conked off ( 2 Sony & 1 JVC) and 1 Panasonic DVD player - because of possibly Delhi dust. So I'd rather go for "disposable" CD player - I know it doesn't make sense but .....

Any suggestions about protecting equipment from dust, power surges, naughty children and other natural calamities

Regards

Dr. Sanjay Dhawan

Doc,

If you like the NAD sound so much you may also consider the NAD AV reciever which to my mind was very musical with audio cd's and did play movies very well too.

I have heard the KEF Q1 via the nad 320bee and they sounded a bit bright but nice on the hole.

Manek.

Thanks Manek !

I surely will try that too.

I am yet to audition KEF Q4 & Coda 90. Do you have any other options to suggest in similar price range?

Regards

Dr. Sanjay Dhawan

Manek,

Tell me one nore thing. If I were to go for NAD AV Receiver then should play the audio CDs through the DVD player of a separate CD Player ? And why?

Thanks

Sanjay

Doc,

Wish regular audio cd's would play as well on DVD players...the audio world would not have a cd player market anymore.

A dedicated CD player will usually beat a DVD player in the same range by a long shot playing audio cd's. Though there are a few DVD players which do play audio CD decently well. One must remember that a DVD player is a jack of all trades but a cd palyer is a master of just one.

So the choice is yours to either buy a Cd player and a separate DVD player or buy one that works reasonably well on both. By the way the NAD DVD players are qute good with auio too....so an all NAD system would definately be one of the choces.

Another option would be denon DVD player with Denon AV amps. Denon DVD's and AV recievers do sound decent with audio CD's. Onkyo and Yamaha AV stuff do leave a lot to be desired on the CD playback though there is a onkyo DVD player which was reviewed recently 501 I think costing about 18k which is said to do very good DVD and CD playback.

Thanks Manek & ARJ!

My system is finally home & running

I zeroed down the following (for the present):
1. NAD 320 BEE Amplifier
2. KEF Coda 90 Speakers
3. Teac CD Player
4. Pioneer DVD Player
5. Monster Speaker & Component Cables

Later I plan to expand to full fledged HT. And certainly would need your help for that too.

Manek, as you mentioned, KEF Q 4 did sound "bright", whereas Coda 90 sounded much more balanced, with depth and good well defined bass.

Right now I have connected the DVD directly to the TV and taken the audio line out from the TV into the Amp to get atleast some stereo effect in the movies.

Now, a question: I have biwired the speakers but I notice that at the amplifier end both the cables are attached to the same terminal (unlike at the speaker end). I can't figure out how would it make any difference. Please explain.

Thanks

Sanjay

Thanks Manek & ARJ! Manek, as you mentioned, KEF Q 4 did sound "bright", whereas Coda 90 sounded much more balanced, with depth and good well defined bass.

Congrats.
speakers need to be "Run in" for around 30 - 100 hours before they sound good. the mechanical parts need to settle down. I have found KEF Q series to have a very good midrange but a Boomy Bass , once run down !

Your Codas will sound better with time

Now, a question: I have biwired the speakers but I notice that at the amplifier end both the cables are attached to the same terminal (unlike at the speaker end). I can't figure out how would it make any difference. Please explain. Thanks Sanjay

Thats how Biwiring is done. Idea is to provide different lines for High frequency anf Low frequency signals..
BTW (Just as a check, hope the jumpers ie the copper connectors connecting the biwirable terminals on the speaker have been removed..)

Enjoy you music

Dear Arj,

Yes the jumpers / connectors form the speaker posts were removed (won't make sense otherwise). I read somewhere it is something to do with induced distortion (by cross over circuits) and its correction at the amplifier end, which is not possible at the speaker end.

Thanks

Sanjay

Dear Arj, Yes the jumpers / connectors form the speaker posts were removed (won't make sense otherwise). I read somewhere it is something to do with induced distortion (by cross over circuits) and its correction at the amplifier end, which is not possible at the speaker end. Thanks Sanjay

that was some quick learning on your part

It is true to some extent and does have a great deal to do with the crossover design , but as in most things to do with audio, theories abound.it works for some and does not work for some. in my case biwiring did not really make any difference..maybe becoz of the high sensitivity of speakers hence the very low current..

In fact many companies do not give a biwiring terminal to their speakers as they feel it messes around with the "House sound"

BTW very interesting Article on Biwiring

http://www.sonicdesign.se/biwire.html

I had the same proble hence Have an old monster cable working as jumpers across the terminals