What kind of price is your friend offering? Better yet, what kind of speakers will you be using? What kind of music will you be playing and what is the room like (size and furnishings)?

Quote:
A friend of a friend offered the C372 at a discount and i was wondering if anybody in this forum has something to say about this amp.

This amplifier is reviewed in the October issue of Stereophile. I don't think you'll be disappointed.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

I'm auditioning a C372 right now ..... and I must say I'm disappointed in it. Most of it seemed good at first, then I noticed a real lack of resolution .... there's little sparkle. The first word that came to me was dull. Headphones confirmed it for me. The headphone output of my CD player shows some resolution to the music .... plugged into the C372 ..... it's rather dull. There's also a slight buzz from the headphone output. It has alot drive and all ..... but it's really missing something. Your results may be better .... I hope !

When I bought my c372 it had been reviewed in one review, and the only problem the reviewer had with it was its low end performance. I went with it anyway because of the offered features, power, history I have with NAD, etc, and I can tell you bass response is outstanding but it DID take a 'minute' for my c372 to open up, i.e. 3 months of listening! When it did it wasn't due to speaker movement or cables - I was running AQ T8 all the while into AS-F2s - but it just bloomed, opened up, punched out - not subtle. A burn in thing? It is a powerful amp. I love it. Was thrilled to see it get reviewed and agree with the review, though I don't think review mentioned anything about burn in. Wondered if it would.

>>Was thrilled to see it get reviewed and agree with the review, though I don't think review mentioned anything about burn in. Wondered if it would. <<

Jdub,

To be honest, I didn't listen for burn-in--and that's something I find difficult to do. I don't really trust my first--or second, or third--impressions of a component, which makes it hard to evaluate rapid changes. Instead, I try to form an impression of a component over time. Maybe because I'm fairly new at this, it takes me a while to achieve anything approaching certainty. At a certain point--it may be weeks or months--I just feel like I've got it nailed. Before that I can jot down all the listening notes I want to and it doesn't mean much.

I guess what I'm saying is that it takes ME so long to settle in to a component that I'm not much use in evaluating transient effects.

Cheers,
Jim Austin

I've been listening to the NAD C372 for about a week and I must say that it absolutely trounces the old NAD 2100X I've used for over 15 years in my main system and the HK 3480 receiver I've been using in my bedroom system, to say nothing of the various multi-channel AV receivers I've auditioned (and returned) in my system.

Compared to the older 'house' NAD sound as exemplified by the NAD 2100X -- warm, a bit thick or wooly, rolled off at the frequency extremes -- the C372 sounds noticeably more extended at the frequency extremes, significantly faster at communicating transients and detail, and exhibits a cleaned-up, more neutral midrange that opens up many recordings that I had previously thought of as congested. The sound of the C372 is also more effortless than that of the 2100X with superior dynamics and slam.

In short, the C372 sound is like a modernized, cleaned-up, squared-up version of the old, easy-to-listen to NAD sound. The new NAD sound is still easy on the ears, but more immediate, revealing, and involving than before.

Compared to the C372, the HK 3480 is plagued with significant grit and grain in the midband, an overly-bright treble, but a more driving and rhythmically involving bass with plenty of speed and wit. I guess you might say the HK feels like it possesses more slam at the expense of overall tonal refinement and detail. In a sense, the HK 3480 exhibits slightly down market classic HK house sound. The 3480 isn't as good-sounding as their earlier integrated amplifiers, but it's a good little middleweight puncher that, despite its noticeable sonic flaws, is enjoyable and exciting to listen to and will drive whatever load you give it without balking or going into protection mode.

A quick note for those wondering how a $900 integrated amplifier like the NAD C372 compares to the likes of the big-box multichannel receivers ( Pioneer VSX-816K or HK AVR-340 ). If you care at all about music, don't even waste your time with receivers of this ilk. The shortcomings are so amazingly noticeable as to be laughable (or cryable). Put aside all the hi-fi jargon and mumbo-jumbo for a moment and let's talk emotional involvement. With either of the two A/V receivers mentioned above, I couldn't get into any of the performances I fed into them from my CD player or my LP playback rig (stepped up with my NAD 1600 phono section). Both the A/V units were just plain awful -- thin bass, clouded and glassy midrange, detail obscured not by thickness but more like a petroleum jelly smearing of transients -- that made the HK 3480 seem like a Krell and the NAD 2100X like a nice tube amp in comparison.

To summarize: if you can afford the NAD integrated amplifiers, get them. My experience with the C372 shows that NAD has come a long way since their Proton-manufactured days of their Monitor Series. If you need more power than the C325BEE or C352 but can't swing a C372, then the HK-3480 is an OK choice, but ultimately not as richly satisfying. The A/V receivers shouldn't even be on your shopping list, they're that bad.

I think Mr. Austin (whose surname is identical to that of my hometown in Texas) got it just about right with his review in Stereophile Magazine. The C372 is entirely sufficient, with an emphasis on _entirely_. It is revealing system colorations and capabilities as well as details in my music library that I never knew existed. As such, I expect it to be the perfect replacement for my now-retired NAD 2100X -- a new 15-year cornerstone about which to build and improve my system and with which to plumb the depths of my growing music library.

Highly recommended.

Carl Durrenberger
San Diego

-----

Associated Equipment: Linn Axis/Akito/Adikt, Sony SCD-CE595 5-disc CD/SACD changer, NAD 1600 Preamplifier/Tuner, NAD 2100X Power Amplifier, HK 3480 Receiver, PSB 400 Speakers, Infinity Primus 360 Speakers, Nordost Blue Heaven interconnect, Linn K20 speaker cable

Hi, I'm a newbie. I can't comment specifically on the C372, but I've owned a C350 for 3 or 4yrs now and I love it. I have it driving a set of Ruark Preludes and find the sound very pleasing. I also find the power, at 60wpc, to be quite adequate.

At the time I bought it, I was auditioning it back to back with a $1500 integrated amp of equal or greater power, on my speakers. The NAD had the edge on this amp who's big selling point was minimal components in the signal path. (Sorry that I'm unable to remember the name of this amp) That edge I spoke of was a deeper soundstage, everything else was neck & Neck.

So, I got good sound, that I'm still happy with, saved $1000 and got a remote, too.

I think you would be happy with it.

Some things have temporarily aligned inside my head. The integrated that I felt my NAD C350 bested was the LFD Audio Mistral LE. Just an FYI.

I just picked up the C-372 last Saturday, after a 2 week wait for it to arrive at my local dealer. Currently it's paired with PSB Image T-45 Towers (the Sienna finish is lovely). Also used were th NAD PP-2 Phono stage, Dual turntable with Audio Technica MM cartridge, and a California Audio Labs CD player.

It's been playing pretty much continuously at a very moderate volume since being hooked up and I find the sound quite good. One thing that is very impressive is that it is exceptionally quiet, when the source material goes dead quiet I don't hear anything except dead silence. It's dynamic and transient response is also quite good.

I don't have any of the "high falutin" LP's or CD's that Stereophiles reviewers love to use. What I have are some really atrocious recordings and mostly pretty good recordings. I buy music because I like the music for what it is. However, I am also quite willing to label the "stinkers" as to what they are, great music mixed by an idiot in the control room who spent way too much time with his ears pinned to the speaker stack. I'll also point out that these "stinkers" are excellent material to use to test out the tone controls.

to test my new system, I used a wide variety of music. First, I used the drum solo on Iron Butterfly's In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida. The drums were reproduced with great clarity and drive. As for the imaging, the ping pong mix on this recording was revealed quite clearly in all of it's atrocity. At one point you can distinctly hear the wood block being "walked" from right to left. However, immediately after the drum solo, the guitar "scratching" comes in and you better have your hand on the volume knob when it does, this mix is so overladen with high frequencies that it will rip your ears out. Bottomline, this combination has exceptional "clarity" and is very revealing of poorly mixed sources. On well done recordings, it sounds damn good. On a poorly mixed recording you'll be turning the volume down very quickly, "forgiving" it is NOT. Note, I should mention that I ruptured an ear drum about 35 years ago and am a bit high frequency sensitive. Keep that in mind because I am probably much more critical of excess highs than most. I may add a parametric equalizer to my system just so I can totally eliminate anything over about 12,000Hz.

As for "listenable" recordings that I auditioned, heres my opinion. First, note that I cut the treble by turning the pointer to the 9:00 position, which will probably become my default for listening to CD's. It helped quite a bit in "easing" my high frequency sensitivity. Mary Chapin Carpenter's Shooting Straight in the Dark was was quite well rendered, especially her lower registers. There were only 2 or 3 points on this album where I found the "burr" in her voice in the higher registers irritating and that was very transient, basically just 2 or 3 notes here and there. However, Down at the Twist and Shout had me turning the volume down, there is just too much high frequency content in this song for my ears. My Patsy Cline Greatist Hits CD had her voice sounding quite lovely overall however it was possible to hear some of the defects due to the age of the master (at one point on "Walkin" the mic preamp overloaded and it was quite audible and there are occasional points were the distortion of that old equipment was quite audible). Elton John's Yellow Brick road sounded fantastic, nothing to fault here. It's a great album and was mastered superbly. Pink Floyd's The Wall had me "crankin" the volume like I haven't in years. It's a beautifly mastered recording and it shows. It's also a great album for demonstrating a systems capability and I can't fault anything about how this amp handles complex detail. Tracks 3, 4, & 5 are my favorites and the helicopter flyby came thru fairly convincingly (come on, no loudspeaker is ever going to reproduce a helicopter in a truly convincing manner). As for sound staging, it's excellent, it was quite easy to "place" the children on the playgound. I also sampled some of my Classical collection, Bach, Mozart, Dvorak, Haydn and couldn't find any faults here, everything sounded great.

Bottomline, I think it's a GREAT value and an excellent amplifier. However it is quite capable of revealing every single detail of a poorly done recording in exquisite detail, a Bose WaveRadio it aint. You'll either have to learn how to "listen past" flaws in material like my Patsy Cline CD or just plunk a WaveRadio on top of your equipment rack.

Quote:
If you need more power than the C325BEE or C352 but can't swing a C372....

I haven't had a chance to hear any of these amps, nor the C320BEE. Other than the wattage is there any difference as to how they sound...compared to one another?

I'm thinking to save on the amp and go for a great speaker. What are thoughts on pairing the NAD C372 with a new Quad ESL -- which doesn't require mega-watts. Any comments on how it'd compare to the NAD M3, or the Creek Audio Destiny with this kind of speaker?

Hi

Ive been using the C372 for two months now and its hard to significantly fault the amp its also hard to get very excited about it.

It just seems dry and uninvolving to me.

I can see how it would work in certain systems but it definetly requires auditioning

Steve