|
NAD C372
28 reviews
(86 views/week)
 4.25 of 5
MSRP: $ 899.00
Description:2 x 150W minimum continuous power into 4/8 ohms, 220W/340W/460W IHF dynamic power into 8/4/2 ohms respectively, bridgeable to 400W mono (8 ohms), A/B speaker outputs with remote switching, headphone socket, high current Holmgren toroidal power transformer, relay input switching, 7 Line inputs including two tape in/outs, all discrete circuitry, short signal path from input to output, all sockets gold plated, Bass and Treble controls with Tone Defeat switch, main amp input and 2 preamp outputs, NAD Soft Clipping, IR input and output, full system remote control including stand-by/off, 12V trigger output, remote control, detachable power cord.
|
 |
 |
|
Rating
Reviewed by:
dada
(Audio Enthusiast)
Review Date
April 14, 2008Overall Rating
 5 of 5
Value Rating
5 of 5
Used product for
More than 1 year |
|  | |
Review 1 of 28
Price Paid:
$699.00
from dmc Summary:
Great amp,beautiful soundstage,very smooth,it took a while for it to break in,at first it was sounding a little harsh,but after a month or so it just smoothed out and keeps sounding better and better,speaker selection is also very important,if you dont like the sound,try changing your speakers,i have run NHT,and HK fifty,good biwire jumpers changed the sound as well. great amp under $2000. Strengths:
power,precise,clear,after break inn. Weaknesses:
long break inn. Similar Products Used:
onkyo integra IA,old HK IA.
|
|
Rating
Reviewed by:
kanishka
(Audio Enthusiast)
Review Date
April 5, 2008Overall Rating
 4 of 5
Value Rating
5 of 5
Used product for
3 Months to 1 year |
| | |
Review 2 of 28
Price Paid:
$800.00
from Dubai Summary:
Very neutral sounding amplifier. Authoritive and controlled bass. Pleasent treble. Great value for money. I tried this with a tube pre and the sound just perfect. Strengths:
Sound, power. Weaknesses:
none for the price. Similar Products Used:
Marantz
|
|
Rating
Reviewed by:
gmeredith
(Audio Enthusiast)
Review Date
February 15, 2008Overall Rating
 3 of 5
Value Rating
3 of 5
Used product for
Less than 1 month Visitors rate this review
4.00 of 5,
4.00 votes
|
| | |
Review 3 of 28
Price Paid:
$825.00
from Butch's Sound & Visi Summary:
I have owned mainly NAD gear since 1982 and have been completely satisfied with it. Recently I looked for a new NAD receiver or integrated amp and finally settled on the C372 since I was familiar with NAD. During my search one dealer told me that NAD was under new ownership but didn't indicate that as a negative. Anyway, after listening to the C372 compared to my other NAD amplification, which consist of a 2200 power amp/1130 preamp combo (over 20 years old) and a 7140 receiver (over 10 years old), the new C372 sounds weak, thin and almost budget quality in terms of musical impact. The 2200 is 100x2 and the 7140 is 40x2 but even my 40 watt NAD delivers a lot more impact. The advantage of the C372 is a little better sound stage/imaging but not enough that worth buying to replace my old gear. The C372 also offers my flexibility in connecting other components/speakers/subs, etc. In a way I am disappointed that NAD's has not seemed to maintain it's muscle when it comes to musical impact due to the fact that I have relied on NAD for audio more than 20 years.. I am afraid to invest further in NAD at this point. I guess its time to venture on to new horizons. I suppose if you are not familiar with vintage NAD components and sound, the C372 may be just what you are looking for. It think its time for me to move on. Strengths:
Hookup flexibility Weaknesses:
Thin sound. Lack of musical impact. Similar Products Used:
NAD 2200 amp. NAD 1130 preamp. NAD 7140 receiver. NAD 510 CD player. NAD 410 tuner. Mission 760 Argonaut Speakers
|
|
Rating
Reviewed by:
Yogi(Unregistered User)
(Casual Listener)
Review Date
June 11, 2007Overall Rating
 1 of 5
Value Rating
1 of 5
Used product for
More than 1 year Visitors rate this review
2.33 of 5,
12.00 votes
|
| | |
Review 4 of 28
Price Paid:
$0.00 Summary:
NAD C-372? Garbage! It worked only one year and a half. CD Player NAD C-542 was even worse. It worked only six months.
I own also a Technics integrated amplifier since 1975 and it is still working.
|
|
Rating
Reviewed by:
Sven van Dam(Unregistered User)
(AudioPhile)
Review Date
June 8, 2007Overall Rating
4 of 5
Value Rating
5 of 5
Used product for
More than 1 year |
| | |
Review 5 of 28
Price Paid:
$600.00 Summary:
After 2 years finaly got the potential out of my 372 by connecting it with biwire cable, with 4 plugs on each side of the cable.
Strangly using normal good quality speakercable (QED XT300) did`t bring out the dynamics and focus it can.
By putting the 8 plugs in my amp i had to use speakergroup A & B and now it operated in bi - amping mode seperating high and mid-low frequencies.
A lot of connecting surface, cable surface and bi-amping mode just made a huge difference.
The magazine `What Hifi` wasn`t very enthausiastic about this amplifier (giving it 2 out of 5 stars) in contrast to it`s EISA award winning predecessor the C370.
In hynesight i` have to agree since il dosed bass and lack of weight and scale are a thing of the past.
I still think it`s strange and poor that connecting it in the old-fashioned single wire way gave such relative poor results.
Strengths:
Very good sound with massive authority due to the watts.
Thrilling focussed and punchy bass, not out of proportion with mid and high frequencies.(that is connected optimal, see above)
Its like a car with a big engine, driving slowly you can also sense the bennefits. Weaknesses:
Unfocussed when connected conventional, see above.
Volume adjustments go in to big steps (using remote)
Similar Products Used:
Nad C272, REGA APOLLO, Clearaudio Smartphono, Canton Vento 807dc, Oehlbach XXL series 6 biwire cable.
|
|
|
|
|
View Comments (1)
