Review Options:
Sorted by Latest Review | Sort by Best Rating |
|
Reviews 1 - 5 (11 Reviews Total)
|
| Next 15 |
User Reviews
Overall Rating:
Value Rating:
Submitted by
Chris
a AudioPhileDate Reviewed: June 3, 2009
Bottom Line: I had a bad experience with reliability on the first one of these, but the second has been reliable. I have not been all that impressed with the sound quality. It seems fake , unnatural, or plastic to me. I compared it directly to the pre amp within a Sansui 9090 by using it with the built in power amp of the 9090. The 9090 preamp sounds natural and musical. It sounds live, and real. The nad sounds ok, but pretty cheap fake and unnatural as I said before. To me this screams poor design when one considers the "improvement" in technology since 1975. At $500.00 the Nad c 160 pre amp was the worst investment I have ever made. I have heard many pre amps and receivers, as well as integrateds that I liked a lot more.
Used product for: 3 Months to 1 year
Duration Product Used: AudioPhile
Product model year: 2000
Overall Rating:
Value Rating:
Submitted by
GORDTEX
a AudioPhileDate Reviewed: February 26, 2004
Bottom Line: this preamp is awesome..just buy it =)
Used product for: 1 to 3 months
Duration Product Used: AudioPhile
Product model year: 2003
Price Paid:
$625.00
Purchased At: audiocentre
Overall Rating:
Value Rating:
Submitted by
Rich
a AudioPhileDate Reviewed: February 28, 2003
Bottom Line: I upgraded to the C-160 from my homemade passive preamp (basically a Radio Shack pot). The NAD, while very very quiet and reasonably transparent, is nonetheless easily audible in the signal path. I also compared it to my 1982 Hafler DH-110 with the Musical Concepts mod, and I have to say I can't hear very much of a difference between their high level inputs (CD), although the NAD's phono section is clearly superior. But my passive pre trumped both these preamps by delivering a more musical sound that emerged from a much blacker background with a heightened sense of aliveness.
Associate equipment is a generic Japanese CD player with digital coax out, an MSB Link DAC III with 96KHz upsampling and upgraded op-amps, a significantly modified Dynaco ST-70 power amp, and average quality Audioquest interconnects.
This is a fine, fine preamp for the money, but I think I now understand why many top-rated preamps cost over $2000.
Used product for: Less than 1 month
Duration Product Used: AudioPhile
Product model year: 2002
Price Paid:
$325.00
Purchased At: eBay (used)
Overall Rating: Value Rating:
Submitted by
miller
a Audio EnthusiastDate Reviewed: January 7, 2003
Bottom Line: This is the first pre-amp I've owned and so far I'm very happy w/it. I got it along w/the 270 amp. It was insanely loud at first, but there's an adjustment knob on the back of the 270 that will turn down it's output level so you can turn up the output level on the c160 pre-amp so that the loudness threshhold is around the 4 or 5-o-clock position on the dial instead of noon or 1. This allows for a much more accurate adjustment of the volume. The unit is very straight forward in it's connections and operation. Overall it's a very practical item in it's appearance and function.
Used product for: 3 Months to 1 year
Duration Product Used: Audio Enthusiast
Price Paid:
$599.00
Purchased At: Sound by Singer
Overall Rating: Value Rating:
Submitted by
Chris G
a Audio EnthusiastDate Reviewed: March 11, 2002
Bottom Line: I listened to the Rotel RA-1070 and the NAD C160 pre-amplifiers at home. San Francisco sound was kind enough to allow me to demo the Rotel. I’m a music junky but not an audiophile. I can appreciate the differences in equipment, but in the end, it’s what sound is most appealing.
I found the NAD to be precise and exceptionally detailed. Vocals are articulate and crystal clear. The sound stage is so expansive, it's as though you’re listening through headsets, you hear every detail. Did I hear that from behind? Also, when the volume is cranked, there is no booming bass impeding the midrange or high end. In other words, you can crank it without losing detail. I jammed my new favorite song, “SLOW COUNTRY” by The Gorillaz, and Damon’s vocals were so there!!! It was brilliant! So were all the effects, sounds and the bass was just amazing, no warbles here! At low listening levels though, the bass is not as full as the Rotel. More on that aspect later. However, slightly increasing the bass tone compensates for that (I can sense the audiophiles squeaming...) While with the NAD, you got every sound concurrently, lows, mids and highs. Is Neil Finn actually in the living room? Overall, if you prefer bass and warmth with your music, you should really try out the Rotel. But if you want exceptional clarity and detail with your music, listen to the NAD C-160. I choose the NAD. I hope I made the right choice mate!
My equipment:
Acurus A150 amp
NHT 2.51 speakers
Onkyo CD player
Used product for: Less than 1 month
Duration Product Used: Audio Enthusiast
Product model year: 2000
Price Paid:
$470.00
Purchased At: Yawaonline.com
|
Reviews 1 - 5 (11 Reviews Total)
|
| Next 15 |
Review Options:
Sorted by Latest Review | Sort by Best Rating |
