Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!info-high-audio-request
From: mikec@wam.umd.edu (Michael D. Callaghan)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: A Weakness in the System?
Message-ID: <7537@uwm.edu>
Date: 9 Nov 90 13:55:58 GMT
Sender: news@uwm.edu
Lines: 26
Approved: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

I have to put in my two cents' worth now. It scares me to see the names
Adcom and Rotel in the same sentence. It's kind of like Mercedes and Ford.

As for the NAD integrated amp, if you like a deep, tight bass, the NAD 
won't do it. I've compared all the NADs vs. all the Adcoms vs all the 
Denons vs all the Yamahas vs all the Nakamichis (amps, that is). All these
companies make "mid-fi" equipment.

The NAD was tied with the Yamaha for last place in bass control. I did find
that their higher-end models were smoother on the top than the Adcom, but
it was minor comparted the Adcom's superior bass control and imaging.

So you know, I sell these things for a living. Most of my listening tests
are conducted through various Acoustat electrostatic loudspeakers, using
either a Yamaha CDX-1130 w/Meridian 203 DAC or an Oracle Delphi Mk III w/
MC Alpha II cartridge. I use a Conrad-Johnson PV-11 tube preamp, Monster
Cable M-1 speaker cable, and M-1000 interconnects throughout the system.

Also, if you can afford the extra money, it's worth it to stay with an
American amplifier and preamplifier. There is no comparison.

(yes, I know that NAD and Adcom, though American companies, are built in
Asia)

'tis all for now...
MikeC