NAD PP2 circuit diagram / schematics

Werner · 22nd November 2005, 07:35 AM

Hi all,

months ago I reverse-engineered an NAD PP-2. Here is the conceptual diagram. Note that abstraction has been made of the actual semiconductors, and that the passives numbering does not match that on the PCB.

It is essentially a PP-1 with an MC headamp added to it. Note the copious use of elcaps for coupling. Also note that total MC gain is about 58dB, as opposed to the promised 60dB.

analog_sa · 22nd November 2005, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Note the copious use of elcaps for coupling

Sickening indeed. If something sells cheap it absolutely needs to be nasty. Lots of free ways to avoid C18/16 but why make the effort?!
And C1? Either paranoia or a really bad opamp.

Thanks for making the effort to publish this. It's nice to know what people mean when they say they like the PP2.

Franz G · 22nd November 2005, 08:52 AM

... since I built a phonoclone and a VSPS, I have just one word for the PP2, I used before:

Absolutely junk! Cheap but not worth the money. Makes you thinking, CD's are definitely better than vinyl.

Franz

ravon · 22nd November 2005, 11:08 AM

... since I have a PP2 which seems to do a fair job (although I have not paid the PP2 yet), reading this topic makes me wonder if it is worthwhile making the effort building a VSPS or if it would be better to invest in a better design or if it may be best to simply pay the PP2.

Just saying that the PP2 is a piece of junk is so easy. Could you elaborate on the differences in sound between a PP2 and a VSPS?

Franz G · 22nd November 2005, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Could you elaborate on the differences in sound between a PP2 and a VSPS?

My english is not good enough, I fear.

Let's try: the PP2 has no dynamics, bad bass, weak mids, no highs compared to the VSPS or phonoclone.

I used it with a Shure V15-III and a Denon DL103.

My recommendation: build a VSPS!

Kind regards
Franz

ravon · 22nd November 2005, 12:40 PM

I'm afraid your english is good enough for me to understand what you mean

I guess I'll have to find some time to build that VSPS. Let's see...

Werner · 23rd November 2005, 01:43 PM

Another example of how to make (relatively) good sound with less components (than the PP-2) was the LFD / Mistral basic phonostage (LFD MM0): MM and MC with just one 5534 per channel and shared 7812/7912s, no less.

http://www.tnt-audio.com/ampli/trigon_e.html

analog_sa · 23rd November 2005, 02:04 PM

The sad part is that NAD obviously knew how to make a decent phono stage 20 years ago. And it wasn't even high-end

Some of their integrateds (3150?) had a very nice sounding phono stage (MM). It used a discrete opamp - Jfet diff input and another 4-5 bipolars and discrete PS regulators. At the time i built a clone using reasonable quality parts - the original parts were indeed horrendous - and quality wise it was easily as good as a Pass Ono. So much for progress.

Cobra2 · 23rd November 2005, 02:27 PM

Cheap ****...

Arne K

Cobra2 · 23rd November 2005, 02:34 PM

"classic-NAD"

Arne K

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Circuit Diagram	epacor	Parts	1	3rd February 2007 06:42 AM
I need Owner's Manual, Schematics Diagram	djdhemitz	Solid State	1	24th August 2006 03:10 PM
Nad NAD C162+C172 diagram(schematics)	Bgt	Solid State	9	16th January 2005 10:04 AM
ML 383 circuit diagram	leigong	Solid State	0	29th June 2004 02:13 PM

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read


	Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving

22nd November 2005, 08:52 AM	#3
Franz G diyAudio Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Bern / Switzerland	... since I built a phonoclone and a VSPS, I have just one word for the PP2, I used before: Absolutely junk! Cheap but not worth the money. Makes you thinking, CD's are definitely better than vinyl. Franz

22nd November 2005, 11:08 AM	#4
ravon diyAudio Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Netherlands	... since I have a PP2 which seems to do a fair job (although I have not paid the PP2 yet), reading this topic makes me wonder if it is worthwhile making the effort building a VSPS or if it would be better to invest in a better design or if it may be best to simply pay the PP2. Just saying that the PP2 is a piece of junk is so easy. Could you elaborate on the differences in sound between a PP2 and a VSPS?

22nd November 2005, 12:40 PM	#6
ravon diyAudio Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Netherlands	I'm afraid your english is good enough for me to understand what you mean I guess I'll have to find some time to build that VSPS. Let's see...

23rd November 2005, 01:43 PM	#7
Werner diyAudio Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Belgium	Another example of how to make (relatively) good sound with less components (than the PP-2) was the LFD / Mistral basic phonostage (LFD MM0): MM and MC with just one 5534 per channel and shared 7812/7912s, no less. http://www.tnt-audio.com/ampli/trigon_e.html

23rd November 2005, 02:04 PM	#8
analog_sa diyAudio Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Sofia	The sad part is that NAD obviously knew how to make a decent phono stage 20 years ago. And it wasn't even high-end Some of their integrateds (3150?) had a very nice sounding phono stage (MM). It used a discrete opamp - Jfet diff input and another 4-5 bipolars and discrete PS regulators. At the time i built a clone using reasonable quality parts - the original parts were indeed horrendous - and quality wise it was easily as good as a Pass Ono. So much for progress.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)