need help for NAD 3020a

[anatech]

Hi Tom,
I know where you are coming from. I generally restore equipment rather than mod it. I also know that circuit can do better if you want to leave it in there.

-Chris

 

[ptwining]

I understand...

My C270 was the finest amp I've ever owned - and believe me I've owned a pile of amps (Krells, Dynacos, even an Ampzilla).

Transparent, crisp, authoritative, and truly the most satisfying piece of sonic electronics.

Can't find a shop in Boston that'll touch it.

Got blown in a neutral drop at my house - crisped the finals - was on at the time.

Even though I build UcD's etc, I haven't got the skills to fix the monster.

Deep regrets. Still have it - waiting for the messiah tech who can fix it.

I hear you loud and clear.

Please world, if you know a competent tech in the boston area - save me!

Regards,
Tom

 

[anatech]

Hi Tom,
There has to be a good technician in your area. Many have changed jobs and will work from home. Avoid TV techs.

Repairing your amp shouldn't be that difficult really. You just need to find a fella that is neat and thorough. Have a look for some of the guys on the forum and point them to this thread.

-Chris

 

[audiobomber]

We did this actual test. NAD vrs NAD pre driving Carver Cube (1st gen) driving a very benign close to resistive load (Magnepan MMG). The Carver went into audible distress at significantly lower volume levels than the NAD. ie the NAD had more effective real world power than the Cube. The differences were more dramatic with tougher loads.

dave

Excepted from Capturing the Music by James Boyk. I've also seen this test referenced elsewhere:

Is an amplifier's power rating meaningful? In one test, various amps drove the same speaker in turn, and a meter measured how loud the speaker could play at a given level of distortion. One amp honestly rated at 20 watts played louder than another amp honestly rated at 100 watts. So much for power ratings. ( Note 7 )

7. The 20W amp was the NAD 3020; the 100W amp was the Quad 405. I remember being struck by this test reported by Martin Colloms. In a personal communication, Mr. Colloms, whose files are in storage and unavailable, confirms that, "The NAD had better peak current and voltage into a complex load."

http://www.performancerecordings.com/capturing-music.html.

My son's 3020 is here for a little while. I checked it out in my secondary system. Sure, I can easily pick out flaws in it. but damn that thing gets the music right. I could easily live with that. It is spellbinding connected to a pair of CSS FR125's.

I had a 3140 that made a pricey Mission 776 (the one with the case that spelled Mission) sound broken (very impressive but painfully bright).

I used a 2150 power amp for a number of years. A friend lent me an original Bryston 3B. The NAD was a million times better. The old Bryston was hard and opaque sounding, with no real soundstage.