NAD C740 Receivers

NAD C740 Receivers 

DESCRIPTION

  • 2 x 35 Watts continuous
  • 40 Watts Dynamic Power into 8 ohms
  • 140 Watts Dynamic Power into 2 ohms
  • NAD Building Blocks: C 740 = C 440 + C 340
  • Impedance Sensing Circuit (ISC) topology
  • Full System Remote control
  • All sockets Gold plated
  • Tone controls defeat switch
  • Pre-out / Main-in
  • Soft Clipping
  • 30 Station random presets (AM or FM) in 3 banks
  • 25 kHz tuning steps
  • MOS-FET RF section and Front-End
  • NAD-Link for remote control capability

  • USER REVIEWS

    Showing 1-10 of 32  
    [Jan 21, 2020]
    SebasZ


    Strength:

    The nad c740 is a great amplifier, dont let the "weak wattage" fool you! The 35 watts feel the same as my onkyo 608 in terms of power, but sounds waaaay better. The amp is build like a tank, the panel and cover are very solid. The connectors feel decent quality but not amazing. The pre out/ in's are great for introducing a poweramp or subwoofer to the experience. Overall if you'd be able to get this amp under 150 bucks, its a not brainer.

    Weakness:

    The volume knob is a bit on the fragile side, but can be easily repaired when broken.

    Price Paid:
    75
    Purchased:
    Used  
    OVERALL
    RATING
    5
    [Jan 06, 2020]
    SteveWisc


    Strength:

    Old school here. When I recently had the opportunity to get this 8/10 for a ridicules price including shipping (from an online vendor I completely trust), I jumped at the opportunity without hesitation. Why? In my opinion, the ND C-740 is the last “pure” stereo receiver ever made. This was the last evolution: C340 – C440 – C740 (3+4=7). In 2003, it was ALL about 5.1 surround. DSP (digital signal processing), Dolby, etc. No DSP, Bluetooth, DAC, wi-fi, push button station scan or streaming here... I bought this for what it DOES have: • 2 x 35 Watts continuous • Impedance Sensing Circuit • 25 kHz tuning steps • “Blend” feature. Weak FM stations will typically default to mono. Blend makes a best effort to provide some level of stereo separation. • All sockets Gold plated “But it’s only 35 watts”… I live in an apartment and am not a “blast it loud” jerk. Right now I run everything thu a Schiit Vali 2 single tube headphone amp/DAC, into a a pair of used B & W DM600 S3 “bookshelf” speakers, or Grado SR80e open backs ($100 on Amazon and a MIND BLOWING deal for the money!) or my “out and about” Sony MDR-7508 headphones. Direct from the C740, the warmth and soundstage of a locked FM station is wonderful. Thru the Vali 2, everything from classical to oldies is eye opening and, at times, breathtaking, especially thru the Grados. I consider this a “new vintage classic”. Looking for another for the bedroom.

    Weakness:

    NONE AT ALL

    Price Paid:
    Ridiculously good
    Purchased:
    Used  
    Model Year:
    2003
    OVERALL
    RATING
    5
    [Sep 16, 2019]
    Rayjazz


    Strength:

    I bought my NAD C 740 new around 2003 or 2004. I needed to downsize components from the separates used to power my Dahlquist DQ-10’s and M&K Goliath sub woofer. I previously used GAS Ampzilla power amp at 200 watts RMS per channel and a GAS Thoebe pre amp. I was also having some minor irritating problems with these like loose RCA connections that were becoming a hassle. Hauling a 75 pound amp around to get repaired was no fun. Anyway, I sold these and went comparison shopping. I have always respected NAD from way back, and when a salesman suggested this low powered receiver I was skeptical. Although it doesn’t have the headroom of the Ampzilla, it has plenty of clean power to drive these speakers to the room filling (Which my wife says is too loud) (12x20’) carpeted sunroom where I do my listening. Recently, I have gotten back into listening to records after a long absence and using the NAD phono preamp I bought with it and an inexpensive Audio Technica turntable is bringing back the joy I had listening to vinyl back in the late 70’s and early 80’s. The NAD does a fine job, and I love having a remote control with such a continuous volume control that can adjust the volume so precisely from my listening spot.

    Weakness:

    None that I have found.

    Purchased:
    New  
    OVERALL
    RATING
    5
    [Feb 17, 2011]
    amateriat
    AudioPhile

    When it comes to hi-fi, I'll simply say that I've been low, and I've been high. and now, many years later, I'm floating at the lower end (from necessity...little need to elaborate), but armed with most of the info-insight to make the most of a tight budget.

    On the used/auction circuit, I've long noticed that NAD products, which, in another lifetime, I used to sell as a high-end retailer, have been relatively thin on the ground, compared to the usual mass-market suspects. This didn't surprise me, as I've long regarded NAD's components to be a cut above the "pack." I'e receommended them with little to no hesitation to friends, and their components grace the systems of more than a few ex-girlfriends who still marvel at how good their CDs, tapes, vinyl or even their iPods sound as a result.

    Now came my turn. I needed, for a host of reasons, to reconstitute my hi-fi, which had been moribund for a number of years. The only components I had left that were worth the proverbial damn were my trusty (and truly high-end) Mission 775SM turntable, coupled with Missions John BIcht-designed 774 tonearm and Signet TK10ML cartridge, and my not-quite-high-end, but still useful NAD 616 dual-well cassette deck. (A notch or two down from my old Nakamichi Dragon and Luxman K-02 decks, but that was then, etc.). I needed new amplification and transduction (speakers), not to mention something to play my several hundred CDs through. For now, let's talk amplification.

    I haven't had a receiver in a system of mine in the proverbial dog's age; it's not that I thought receivers were "bad" I knew otherwise, starting with NAD), but that I simply thought separates offered a better bang. Now, for various reasons, I decided a well-chosen receiver would work just fine, and the go-to choice was NAD, because (1) for one thing, very few mainstream electronics companies were even bothering to make audio-only receivers, offering instead gadget-rich multichannel AV receivers offering tons of things I wasn't interested in (hint: I don't own a TV), and offered mediocre audio quality as a result; and (2) I knew NAD's product DNA well enough to know that almost anything they made would be at least a notch above whatever the usual suspects were offering.

    I went with a used (via a Certain Auction Site) NAD C740. An oldie by now, but a goodie by my lights, as it offered almost everything I wanted in a receiver: besides its audio performance (which is close to unassailable in its category), it offered the convenience of a remote control that not only handled, via NAD Link, my trusty NAD 616 cassette deck (the remote even has separate controls for each cassette deck well), but cold also handle the one CD changer I longed to have, but could never find an intact (read: working) example for love or money, until recently. The one thing it couldn't handle on its own was vinyl, a problem solved handily by running out ad buying (new, for a change), an NAD PP3i. I'll be talking about the PP3i in a separate review; suffice it to say that the photo preamp lives up to its billing, and is likely a better performer than anything NAD might have built into a receiver like the C 740.

    Suffice it to say that, where and when it counts, the NAD C-740 simply does the business. With more than enough conservatively-rated power for driving most any speaker system to realistic sound-levels, an excellent tuner section, and preamplification that doesn't draw undue attention to draw attention to itself.

    Highly recommended...if you can find one. :-)

    OVERALL
    RATING
    5
    VALUE
    RATING
    4
    [Mar 13, 2004]
    duoaksea
    Audio Enthusiast

    Strength:

    Plenty of power Fantastic tuner Clean, lively sound

    Weakness:

    Clumsy tuner controls Limited Remote Control

    -

    OVERALL
    RATING
    5
    VALUE
    RATING
    5
    [Feb 12, 2004]
    russwollman
    Audio Enthusiast

    Strength:

    Versatility. Simple controls.Simple remote control. Value for the money. Unique, pleasing design that wears well.

    Weakness:

    None that I have encountered.

    The C740 has a room for multiple inputs, a pretty good tuner (though not quite as good as the old 7100 Monitor Series receiver with its Schotz tuner), and a clean, simple design suggestive of the clean output of which the C740 is capable. This receiver, as NAD claims, is powerful and capable well beyond its numbers. For a while my C740 happily drove four elderly Advent Loudspeakers without a whimper. But now it's my preamp and drives an old NAD 2600 amp which sends 150 watts/channel to those Advents. The sound is glorious, powerful, and stunning. There's a great honesty and simplicity about NAD products that inspires my confidence.

    Similar Products Used:

    NAD 7100 Monitor Series Receiver with Advent 5012s and AR3as, and Sony X202ES CD player. NAD L40 CD Receiver with Smaller Advent Loudspeakers. NAD C541i CD player Nakamichi SB-1s CD player. Sony SCD-XE670 SACD player

    OVERALL
    RATING
    5
    VALUE
    RATING
    5
    [Jan 22, 2004]
    jvshort
    Audio Enthusiast

    Strength:

    Good sound, powerful, smooth and detailed.

    Weakness:

    No phono stage.

    I've owned it for almost 5 years. As an amp it is smooth and powerful (much more than its 35 W per channel suggest, an evidence that volume is not a question of watts), it drives my floorstanding speakers fine. The radio receiver sounds nice too, if you have a good aerial (I have connected it to the TV/radio cable, it sounds great!). All the connects are gold plated. It's got two tape inputs, very useful if you have both a tape deck and a cd recorder and you like to make cds from analogue sources.

    Similar Products Used:

    Sony

    OVERALL
    RATING
    5
    VALUE
    RATING
    4
    [Dec 27, 2003]
    Donald Walters
    Audio Enthusiast

    Strength:

    Features, looks and performance for the $$$.

    Weakness:

    Here is the only weakness I see is that the unit gets hot quick and shuts down. The unit sits on top of my NAD CD player and gets pleanty of air. I have 3 pair of Speaker Craft 6.1 wall speakers and inwall Russell volume controls on each pair. No idea why it shuts down at quarter volume after 15 minutes.

    In general I love my NAD unit. I like the clean looks and it does perform very well.

    Similar Products Used:

    Yamaha RX-V795 Tuner

    OVERALL
    RATING
    4
    VALUE
    RATING
    4
    [Jun 18, 2003]
    nadstone
    Audio Enthusiast

    Strength:

    Power, Clarity

    Weakness:

    None

    I may have a little different taste in the way I like music to sound. I want the ultimate in just "listening" to music and I like to crank it when I can. The NAD C 740 is a pleasant surprise. 35 WATTS ? My 6 year old Yamaha is rated at 70 and the NAD is alot louder! But from reading on this sight I guess that is a different story. I am hearing sounds that I never heard before on recordings I have listened to for over 30 years. The system I use incorporates the c 740 that gets the source signal from an NAD c 350 through the tape monitor loop. Each amp powers their own set of speakers through an equalizer (Alesis Digital EQ 230 and Boston cr 75's with a sub through the pre-outs for the c 740, B & W 602 S3's with a Yamaha EQ in the front with the c 350). This is home STEREO not theatre. If you need a stereo receiver, simply buy the c 740. NAD gives you more options for equipment than most. Cannot be beat for the price. I still have room for another set of speakers on the c 740. You can do this with an NAD product. Won't hurt it. I may blow up my electrical box though.

    Similar Products Used:

    NAD C 740 NAD C 350 NAD C 521 CD B & W 602 S3 Boston Acoustic CR 75 Alesis Digital EQ 230 Yamaha WQ70 Carver sub

    OVERALL
    RATING
    5
    VALUE
    RATING
    4
    [Feb 21, 2003]
    Professor Dave
    Audio Enthusiast

    Strength:

    Very smooth sounding

    Weakness:

    There really are none, just minor ergonomic things and I would like to have had a sleep timer.

    I have been researching various products for my listening pleasure for my home office. I have a Marantz SR8000 and quite frankly the 5.1 sound does not compare to that of a solid 2 channel system. I also happen to like radio, so the convieniece of a tuner and an amp was nice - otherwise an integrated amp would be the way to go, but I did not want to spend that much money. I was debating between, NAD, YAMAHA, ROTEL, and DENON. They were all around the same price (except for the ROTEL) The sound wass very smooth and eventually won me over. By the way... as I was shopping for the NAD C-740 the cheapest I found it was $395 on the internet, but according to NAD, unless you buy it from an authorized dealer, the warranty is null and void. I have bought enough equipment in my time to appreciate the value of a local dealer who can handle an issues that may occur. the $60 difference in price wasn't worth purchasing on the internet.

    Similar Products Used:

    Yamaha RX-777, Marantz SR8000

    OVERALL
    RATING
    5
    VALUE
    RATING
    4
    Showing 1-10 of 32  

    (C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.

    audioreview.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

    Other Web Sites in the ConsumerReview Network:

    mtbr.com | roadbikereview.com | carreview.com | photographyreview.com | audioreview.com